Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice of recently enacted public laws.

To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents electronic mailing list, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your e-mail address, then follow the instructions to join, leave, or manage your subscription.

8261Friday, March 31, 2017Rules and RegulationsDEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITYOffice of the Secretary6 CFR Part 5[Docket No. DHS-2016-0075]Privacy Act of 1974: Implementation of Exemptions; Department of Homeland Security/United States Coast Guard-031 USCG Law Enforcement (ULE) System of RecordsAGENCY:

Privacy Office, DHS.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Department of Homeland Security is issuing a final rule to amend its regulations to exempt portions of a newly established system of records titled, “Department of Homeland Security/United States Coast Guard-031 USCG Law Enforcement (ULE) System of Records” from certain provisions of the Privacy Act. Specifically, the Department exempts portions of the “Department of Homeland Security/United States Coast Guard-031 USCG Law Enforcement (ULE) System of Records” from one or more provisions of the Privacy Act because of criminal, civil, and administrative enforcement requirements.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) United States Coast Guard (USCG) published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register, 81 FR 88635, December 8, 2016, proposing to exempt portions of the system of records from one or more provisions of the Privacy Act because of criminal, civil, and administrative enforcement requirements. The system of records is the DHS/USCG-031 USCG Law Enforcement (ULE) System of Records. The DHS/USCG-031 USCG Law Enforcement (ULE) System of Records notice was published concurrently in the Federal Register, 81 FR 88697, December 8, 2016, and comments were invited on both the NPRM and System of Records Notice (SORN).

Public Comments

DHS received no comments on the NPRM and no comments on the SORN.

List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 5

Freedom of information, Privacy.

For the reasons stated in the preamble, DHS amends chapter I of Title 6, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

PART 5—DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS AND INFORMATION1. Revise the authority citation for part 5 to read as follows:Authority:

6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.; Pub. L. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135; 5 U.S.C. 301.

Subpart A also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552. Subpart B also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552a.

2. Add at the end of appendix C to part 5, paragraph 77 to read as follows:Appendix C to Part 5—DHS Systems of Records Exempt From the Privacy Act

77. The DHS/USCG-031 USCG Law Enforcement (ULE) System of Records consists of electronic and paper records and will be used by DHS and its components. The DHS/USCG-031 USCG Law Enforcement (ULE) System of Records is a repository of information held by DHS in connection with its several and varied missions and functions, including, but not limited to the enforcement of civil and criminal laws; investigations, inquiries, and proceedings there under; and national security and intelligence activities. The DHS/USCG-031 USCG Law Enforcement (ULE) System of Records contains information that is collected by, on behalf of, in support of, or in cooperation with DHS and its components and may contain personally identifiable information collected by other federal, state, local, tribal, foreign, or international government agencies. The Secretary of Homeland Security, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), has exempted this system from the following provisions of the Privacy Act: 5 U.S.C. 552a (c)(3-4); (d); (e)(1-3), (e)(5), (e)(8); and (g). Additionally, the Secretary of Homeland Security, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2) has exempted this system from the following provisions of the Privacy Act: 5 U.S.C. 552a (c)(3); (d); (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I); and (f). When a record received from another system has been exempted in that source system under 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), DHS will claim the same exemptions for those records that are claimed for the original primary systems of records from which they originated and claims any additional exemptions set forth here.

Exemptions from these particular subsections are justified, on a case-by-case basis to be determined at the time a request is made, for the following reasons:

(a) From subsection (c)(3) and (4) (Accounting for Disclosures) because release of the accounting of disclosures could alert the subject of an investigation of an actual or potential criminal, civil, or regulatory violation to the existence of that investigation and reveal investigative interest on the part of DHS as well as the recipient agency. Disclosure of the accounting would therefore present a serious impediment to law enforcement efforts and/or efforts to preserve national security. Disclosure of the accounting would also permit the individual who is the subject of a record to impede the investigation, to tamper with witnesses or evidence, and to avoid detection or apprehension, which would undermine the entire investigative process.

(b) From subsection (d) (Access to Records) because access to the records contained in this system of records could inform the subject of an investigation of an actual or potential criminal, civil, or regulatory violation to the existence of that investigation and reveal investigative interest on the part of DHS or another agency. Access to the records could permit the individual who is the subject of a record to impede the investigation, to tamper with witnesses or evidence, and to avoid detection or apprehension. Amendment of the records could interfere with ongoing investigations and law enforcement activities and would impose an unreasonable administrative burden by requiring investigations to be continually reinvestigated. In addition, permitting access and amendment to such information could disclose security-sensitive information that could be detrimental to homeland security.

(c) From subsection (e)(1) (Relevancy and Necessity of Information) because in the course of investigations into potential violations of federal law, the accuracy of information obtained or introduced occasionally may be unclear, or the information may not be strictly relevant or necessary to a specific investigation. In the interests of effective law enforcement, it is appropriate to retain all information that may aid in establishing patterns of unlawful activity.

(d) From subsection (e)(2) (Collection of Information from Individuals) because requiring that information be collected from the subject of an investigation would alert the subject to the nature or existence of the investigation, thereby interfering with that investigation and related law enforcement activities.

(e) From subsection (e)(3) (Notice to Subjects) because providing such detailed information could impede law enforcement by compromising the existence of a confidential investigation or reveal the identity of witnesses or confidential informants.

(f) From subsection (e)(5) (Collection of Information) because with the collection of information for law enforcement purposes, it is impossible to determine in advance what information is accurate, relevant, timely, and complete. Compliance with subsection (e)(5) would preclude DHS agents from using their investigative training and exercise of good judgment to both conduct and report on investigations.

(g) From subsection (e)(8) (Notice on Individuals) because compliance would interfere with DHS's ability to obtain, serve, and issue subpoenas, warrants, and other law enforcement mechanisms that may be filed under seal and could result in disclosure of investigative techniques, procedures, and evidence.

(h) From subsection (g) (Civil Remedies) to the extent that the system is exempt from other specific subsections of the Privacy Act.

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain M7 Aerospace LLC Models SA226-T, SA226-AT, SA226-T(B), SA226-TC, SA227-AC (C-26A), SA227-AT, SA227-BC (C-26A), SA227-CC, SA227-DC (C-26B), and SA227-TT airplanes. This AD was prompted by detachment of the power lever linkage to the TPE331 engine propeller pitch control. This AD requires repetitively inspecting the propeller pitch control for proper torque, with corrections as necessary until required replacement or rework of the PPC assembly to have a threaded hole in the splined end of the shouldered shaft and installation of a secondary retention device is done. We are issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:

This AD is effective May 5, 2017.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of May 5, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

For service information identified in this final rule, contact M7 Aerospace LLC, 10823 NE Entrance Road, San Antonio, Texas 78216; phone: (210) 824-9421; fax: (210) 804-7766; Internet: http://www.elbitsystems-us.com; email: MetroTech@M7Aerospace.com; or Honeywell International Inc. 111 S. 34th Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85034-2802; phone: (855) 808-6500; email: AeroTechSupport@honeywell.com; Internet: https://aerospace.honeywell.com/en/services/maintenance-and-monitoring. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 816-329-4148. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9531.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9531; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain M7 Aerospace LLC Models SA226-T, SA226-AT, SA226-T(B), SA226-TC, SA227-AC (C-26A), SA227-AT, SA227-BC (C-26A), SA227-CC, SA227-DC (C-26B), and SA227-TT airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on December 28, 2016 (81 FR 95528). The NPRM was prompted by reports of the airplane power lever linkage detaching from the TPE331 engine propeller pitch control (PPC) shaft. In flight operations, detachment may result in fuel flow to the engine remaining constant regardless of the power lever movement by the pilot. The orientation of the engine on certain M7 Aerospace airplanes increases the vulnerability of detachment. The PPC lever is an airplane part and its detachment from the TPE311 has been the subject of previous ADs on other airplane type designs. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive inspections of the PPC lever with corrective action as necessary until required replacement or rework of the PPC assembly to have a threaded hole in the splined end of the shouldered shaft and installation of a secondary retention feature for the airplane control linkage interface is done. We are issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on these products.

Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed. We have determined that these minor changes:

• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and

• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

We reviewed M7 Aerospace LLC SA226 Series Service Bulletin 226-76-012, dated March 17, 2015; M7 Aerospace LLC SA227 Series Service Bulletin 227-76-007, dated March 17, 2015; and M7 Aerospace LLC SA227 Series Commuter Category Service Bulletin CC7-76-004, dated March 17, 2015; that, in combination with the temporary revisions and service bulletin listed below, describes the actions that must be done for the applicable models to comply with this AD.

We also reviewed Honeywell International Inc. Service Bulletin TPE331-72-2190, dated December 21, 2011, that describes procedures for replacing or reworking the propeller pitch control assembly, incorporating a threaded hole in the splined end of the shouldered shaft, and reassembling the propeller pitch control assembly.

This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section of this document.

We estimate the following costs to do any necessary adjustments that would be required based on the results of the visual inspection. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these adjustments:

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,

(2) Is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and

(4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

This AD was prompted by detachment of the power lever linkage to the TPE331 engine propeller pitch control (PPC). We are issuing this AD to prevent detachment of the power lever linkage to the TPE331 engine PPC, which could result in uncommanded change to the engine power settings with consequent loss of control.

(f) Compliance

Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.

(g) Applicable M7 Aerospace LLC Service Bulletins

Use the applicable service bulletins as listed in paragraph (g)(1), (2), or (3) of this AD as reference to complete the actions in paragraph (i)(1) or (2) of this AD:

(1) Within 100 hours time-in-service (TIS) after May 5, 2017 (the effective date of this AD) and repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 hours TIS, visually inspect the PPC lever to assure the attachment is properly installed following the applicable service information listed in paragraph (h)(1)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this AD, as applicable.

(2) The rework/replacement required by paragraph (i) of the AD and the installation of the secondary retention device required in paragraph (j) of this AD terminate the repetitive visual inspections of the PPC lever attachment required by paragraph (h)(1) of this AD.

(i) Replace or Rework the Propeller Pitch Assembly

Within the next 600 hours TIS after May 5, 2017 (the effective date of this AD) or within the next 12 months after May 5, 2017 (the effective date of this AD), whichever occurs first, do the actions in either paragraph (i)(1) or (2) of this AD following the Accomplishment Instructions in Honeywell International Inc. Service Bulletin TPE331-72-2190, dated December 21, 2011, as referenced in the applicable service information listed in paragraph (g)(1), (2), or (3) this AD.

(1) Replace the PPC. Remove the PPC assembly and replace with the applicable new design PPC using the part numbers listed in table 1 to paragraph (i)(1) of this AD.

(2) Rework the PPC assembly. Inspect the splined end of the shouldered shaft for the presence and good condition of a threaded hole, repairing or replacing the cam assembly, and reworking the PPC assembly as necessary.

(j) Secondary Retention Feature

(1) Before further flight after the replacement or rework of the PPC assembly required in paragraph (i)(1) or (2) of this AD, install the secondary retention feature on the PPC assembly following the applicable service information listed in paragraph (j)(1)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this AD.

(2) The rework/replacement required by paragraph (i) of this AD and the installation of the secondary retention device required by paragraph (j) of this AD terminate the requirement for the repetitive inspections of the PPC lever torque required in paragraph (h) of this AD.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

(1) The Manager, Fort Worth Airplane Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the ACO, mail it to the attention of one of the people identified in paragraph (l), Related Information, of this AD or email the request to 9-asw-FWACO@faa.gov.

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

(l) Related Information

For more information about this AD, contact one of the following people:

(4) You may view this service information at FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 816-329-4148.

(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Airbus Model A330-243, -243F, -341, -342, and -343 airplanes. This AD requires an inspection to determine if affected hydraulic pressure tube assemblies are installed, and replacement with serviceable hydraulic pressure tube assemblies if necessary. This AD also requires repetitive replacements of serviceable hydraulic pressure tube assemblies. This AD was prompted by a determination that cracks can develop on the ripple damper of the hydraulic pressure tube assembly and reports of failure of the ripple damper of the hydraulic pressure tube assembly. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:

This AD becomes effective April 17, 2017.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of April 17, 2017.

We must receive comments on this AD by May 15, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:

For service information identified in this final rule, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email airworthiness.A330-A340@airbus.com; Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0245.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0245; or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2017-0041, dated February 24, 2017; corrected February 28, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Model A330-243, -243F, -341, -342, and -343 airplanes. The MCAI states:

Following introduction in-service of Airbus modification (mod) 205242, a new hydraulic pressure tube assembly Part Number (P/N) AE711121-18 was installed, one on each engine, with an integral ripple damper. It was determined that, at a relatively low number of cycles, cracks can develop on the ripple damper weld of this new hydraulic pressure tube, which could lead to hydraulic leakage and consequent loss of the green hydraulic system. Recently, there has been a high rate of failure of the affected dampers that, if continued, may exceed the overall safety objective of the certified design.

This condition, if not corrected, could, in combination with other system failures, result in reduced control of the aeroplane.

For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires [inspection for and] replacement of each affected hydraulic pressure tube assembly with a [serviceable] tube assembly having the double welded ripple damper installed. This [EASA] AD also requires implementation of a life limit on the new part [i.e., repetitive replacements of serviceable hydraulic pressure tube assemblies]. This [EASA] AD is considered as interim measure and further AD action may follow.

This [EASA] AD is republished to correct the TCDS number and add a previous manufacturer name.

You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0245.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

Airbus has issued Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) A71L012-16, Revision 01, dated February 24, 2017. The service information describes procedures for replacing hydraulic pressure tube assembly, part number (P/N) AE711121-18, and hydraulic pressure tube assembly, P/N AE711121-18 Rev A. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of these same type design.

Difference Between This AD and the MCAI

The MCAI mandates replacement of the hydraulic pressure tube assembly, using Airbus AOT A71L012-16, Revision 01, dated February 24, 2017. However, Airbus AOT A71L012-16, Revision 01, dated February 24, 2017, also specifies to first inspect or do a records review to determine the part number of the hydraulic pressure tube assembly. Therefore, paragraph (i) of this AD requires the inspection or records review.

The MCAI includes a compliance time of “within 5 months” for the replacement of the affected part. We have determined that a compliance time of “within 4 months” is necessary to adequately address the identified unsafe condition. We have included the 4-month compliance time in paragraphs (j), (l), and (m) of this AD.

We have coordinated these differences with EASA.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because cracks can develop on the ripple damper of the hydraulic pressure tube assembly, which could lead to hydraulic leakage and consequent loss of the green hydraulic system and because of reports of failure of the ripple damper of the hydraulic pressure tube assembly. This condition could, in combination with other system failures, result in reduced control of the airplane. Therefore, we determined that notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in fewer than 30 days.

Comments Invited

This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2017-0245; Directorate Identifier 2017-NM-023-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD based on those comments.

We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this AD.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 53 airplanes of U.S. registry.

We also estimate that it will take about 5 work-hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $20,000 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to be $1,082,525, or $20,425 per product.

According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. “Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,” describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in “Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;

2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);

3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

This AD was prompted by a determination that cracks can develop on the ripple damper of the hydraulic pressure tube assembly, which could lead to hydraulic leakage and consequent loss of the green hydraulic system. This AD was also prompted by reports of failure of the ripple damper of the hydraulic pressure tube assembly. We are issuing this AD to prevent cracking and failure of the ripple damper of the hydraulic pressure tube assembly, which could, in combination with other system failures, result in reduced control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.

(g) Definition of Affected Part

For the purpose of this AD, a hydraulic pressure tube assembly, part number (P/N) AE711121-18, as introduced by Airbus mod 205242, is hereafter referred to as an “affected part” in this AD.

(h) Definition of Serviceable Part

For the purpose of this AD, a “serviceable part” is a hydraulic pressure tube assembly (which has a double-welded ripple damper installed), P/N AE711121-18 Rev A, that has accumulated fewer than 800 total flight cycles since first installation on an airplane. The hydraulic pressure tube assembly, P/N AE711121-18 Rev A, is introduced by Airbus mod 206979 on the production line.

(i) Identification of Affected Parts

Within 15 days after the effective date of this AD, inspect to determine the part number of the hydraulic pressure tube assembly that is installed on each engine. A review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of this inspection if the part number of the hydraulic pressure tube assembly can be conclusively determined from that review.

(j) Replacement of Affected Parts

Within the compliance time specified in table 1 to paragraph (j) of this AD, as applicable, or within 4 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, replace each affected part (see paragraph (g) of this AD) with a serviceable part (see paragraph (h) of this AD), in accordance with the instructions of Airbus Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) A71L012-16, Revision 01, dated February 24, 2017.

Table 1 to Paragraph (j) of This AD—Replacement Compliance TimesFlight cycles accumulated *Compliance timeFewer than 775 total flight cyclesBefore exceeding 800 total flight cycles on the affected hydraulic pressure tube assembly since first installation on an airplane.775 total flight cycles or moreWithin 25 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD.An unknown number of flight cycles accumulatedWithin 25 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD.* Unless specified otherwise, the flight cycles in the “flight cycles accumulated” column of table 1 to paragraph (j) of this AD are those accumulated by an affected hydraulic pressure tube assembly, on the effective date of this AD, since first installation on an airplane.(k) Repetitive Replacement of Serviceable Parts—Life Limit

Before a serviceable part (see paragraph (h) of this AD) exceeds 800 total flight cycles since first installation on an airplane, replace it with a serviceable part, in accordance with the instructions of Airbus AOT A71L012-16, Revision 01, dated February 24, 2017.

(l) Engine Installation Limitation

As of the effective date of this AD, except as required by paragraph (m) of this AD, it is allowed to install on any airplane a replacement engine having an affected part (see paragraph (g) of this AD) installed, provided that, before that affected part exceeds 800 total flight cycles since first installation on an airplane, or within 4 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, the part is replaced with a serviceable part (see paragraph (h) of this AD), in accordance with the instructions of Airbus AOT A71L012-16, Revision 01, dated February 24, 2017.

(m) Parts and Engine Installation Prohibition

As of 4 months after the effective date of this AD: Do not install on any airplane an affected part (see paragraph (g) of this AD), or an engine having an affected part installed.

(n) Credit for Previous Actions

This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph (j) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Airbus AOT A71L012-16, dated December 22, 2016.

(o) Other FAA AD Provisions

The following provisions also apply to this AD:

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1138; fax 425-227-1149. Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-116-AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(p) Related Information

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2017-0041, dated February 24, 2017; corrected February 28, 2017, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0245.

(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 81-09-09 for certain Meggitt (Troy), Inc. (previously known as Stewart Warner South Wind Corporation and as Stewart Warner South Wind Division) Model Series (to include all the variants) 921, 930, 937, 940, 944, 945, 977, 978, 979, 8240, 8253, 8259, and 8472 combustion heaters. AD 81-09-09 required repetitive inspections of the combustion heater; repetitive installation inspections of the combustion heater; and, for combustion heaters having 1,000 hours or more time-in-service (TIS), overhaul of the combustion heater. This new AD requires detailed repetitive inspections, repetitive pressure decay tests, and disable/removal of the combustion heater if necessary. This AD was prompted by an airplane accident and reports that the heater was malfunctioning. We are issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:

This AD is effective May 5, 2017.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of May 5, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

For service information identified in this final rule, contact Meggitt Control Systems, 3 Industrial Drive, Troy, Indiana 47588; telephone: (812) 547-7071; fax: (812) 547-2488; email: infotroy@meggitt.com; Internet: www.stewart-warner.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (816) 329-4148. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-0603.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-0603; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

We issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 81-09-09, Amendment 39- 4102 (46 FR 24936, May 4, 1981) (“AD 81-09-09”). The SNPRM published in the Federal Register on November 3, 2016 (81 FR 76532). We preceded the SNPRM with a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that published in the Federal Register on August 20, 2014 (79 FR 49249). The NPRM proposed to retain most actions from AD 81-09-09, add a calendar time to the repetitive inspections, add more detailed actions to the inspections, and add a pressure decay test (PDT). The NPRM was prompted by an airplane accident and reports we received of the heater malfunctioning. The SNPRM proposed to retain the actions proposed in the NPRM, add combustion heater models series to the applicability, and modify the compliance times. We also completed and included in the SNPRM an initial regulatory flexibility analysis. We are issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on these products.

Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. The following presents the comments received on the SNPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request

The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) requested we change the wording in paragraph (k) of this AD, Removal or Disable of the Combustion Heater. If an operator installs or re-enables an applicable combustion heater, the SNPRM requires the operator to do either the inspections required by the AD, disable the heater, or remove the heater. However, the actions of remove or disable would not apply to an operator installing or re-enabling a heater. EASA requested we only require the inspections for a heater that has been re-enabled and only require the inspections or disable options for a heater that has been installed.

We partially agree with this comment. We agree that the wording of the SNPRM may be confusing—re-enable the heater and then disable or remove it. However, we do not agree with completely omitting the disable or removal options. If an operator installs or re-enables an applicable heater, that heater must be inspected as required by the AD, and, if it fails the inspections, the heater must be disabled or removed.

We changed the language in paragraph (k) of this AD, Removal or Disable of the Combustion Heater, to clarify our intent.

Supportive Comment

Tony Dillberg concurred with the SNPRM as drafted.

Conclusion

We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this AD with the changes described previously, replacing the initial regulatory flexibly analysis (IRFA) with a final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA), and minor editorial changes. We have determined that the change from an IRFA to a FRFA and the minor changes:

• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the SNPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and

• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the SNPRM.

We also determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

We reviewed the following service information that applies to this AD:

For the applicable models as specified, the service information above describes procedures for inspection of the combustion heater and inspection of the installation of the combustion heater for the applicable heater models.

We also reviewed Meggitt Inspection Procedure, Pressure Decay Test, Aircraft Heaters, dated May 17, 2014. This service information describes procedures for the PDT for airplane combustion heaters for certain heater models specified in the document.

This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Other Related Service Information

We reviewed the following service information that applies to this AD.

For the applicable models specified in the documents, the service information above describes procedures for the inspections required by this AD and may be used for procedural guidance when applying for an alternative method of compliance.

Cost on U.S. operatorsInspections and PDT of the combustion heater7 work-hours × $85 per hour = $595Not Applicable$595$3,748,500

We estimate the following costs to do any necessary combustion heater disable/removal/related component replacement that would be required based on the results of the inspections/PDT. We have no way of determining the number of airplanes that might need a combustion heater disable/removal/related component replacement:

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

This section presents the final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) that was done for this action. We have reworded and reformatted for Federal Register publication purposes. The FRFA in its original form can be found on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for Docket No. FAA-2014-0603.

Introduction and Purpose of This Analysis

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA) establishes “as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to regulation.” To achieve this principle, the RFA requires agencies to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals are seriously considered.” The RFA covers a wide-range of small entities, including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.

Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must prepare a FRFA as described in the RFA. The FAA finds that this AD will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, in the following sections we discuss the compliance requirements of the AD, the cost of compliance, and the economic impact on small entities.

Section 604 of the Act requires agencies to prepare a FRFA describing the impact of final rules on small entities. Section 604(a) of the Act specifies the content of a FRFA.

Each FRFA must contain:

—A statement of the need for, and objectives of, the rule;—A statement of the significant issues raised by the public comments in response to the initial regulatory flexibility analysis, a statement of the assessment of the agency of such issues, and a statement of any changes made in the rule as a result of such comments;—The response of the agency to any comments filed by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration in response to the proposed rule, and a detailed statement of any change made in the final rule as a result of the comments;—A description of and an estimate of the number of small entities to which the rule will apply or an explanation of why no such estimate is available;—A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping and other compliance requirements of the rule, including an estimate of the classes of small entities which will be subject to the requirement and the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report or record; and—A description of the steps the agency has taken to minimize the significant economic impact on small entities consistent with the stated objectives of applicable statutes, including a statement of the factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting the alternative adopted in the final rule and why each one of the other significant alternatives to the rule considered by the agency which affect the impact on small entities was rejected.

The head of the FAA certifies that this rulemaking will result in a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

1. Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, the Final Rule

Title 49 of the U.S. Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the FAA's authority.

We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on the airplanes identified in this AD.

2. A Statement of the Significant Issues Raised by the Public, a Statement of the Assessment of the Agency of Such Issues, and a Statement of Any Changes Made

There were no comments submitted on the economic analysis from the SNPRM (81 FR 76532, November 3, 2016), nor were there any comments submitted that specifically addressed small business entities.

3. The Response of the Agency to Any Comments Filed by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration in Response to the Proposed Rule, and a Detailed Statement of Any Change Made in the Final Rule as a Result of the Comments

The Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration did not comment on the proposed rulemaking.

4. A Description of and an Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the Rule Will Apply or an Explanation of Why No Such Estimate Is Available

The rulemaking will supersede AD 81-09-09, which applies to 8000 series Meggitt combustion heaters installed on certain twin-engine piston airplanes, primarily Cessna 300 and 400 series airplanes, but also installed on the Beech D18S twin-engine airplane and some Britten Norman twin-engine piston airplanes. The AD will extend applicability to 900 series Meggitt combustion heaters installed on certain Cessna single-engine piston airplanes, Cessna 310 twin-engine airplanes, Lake LA-4 and LA-250 airplanes, certain Ryan Navion single-engine piston airplanes and certain Piper PA-23 and PA-30 airplanes. The FAA airplane registry indicates that there are 4,121 airplanes of the models equipped with 8000 series Meggitt combustion heaters, and 2,123 airplanes of the models equipped with 900 series Meggitt combustion heaters. The FAA expects many of these airplanes will be owned by small entities in many different industries. These entities constitute a substantial number of small entities.

Since many of these airplanes are registered to Limited Liability Companies (LLCs), Limited Liability Partnerships (LLPs) and other company forms typically suited for single proprietors, small partnerships, etc., we conclude that the cost of this AD will affect a substantial number of small entities.

5. Reporting, Record Keeping, and Other Compliance Requirements and Costs of the AD

Small entities will incur no new reporting and record-keeping requirements as a result of this rule. The compliance requirements for this AD will carry over the following requirements from AD 81-09-09:

—Heater inspection every 250 hours of heater operation, in accordance with the manufacturer's service manual.—General inspection of the heater installation at the same time as the 250-hour inspection.

This AD will add the following new provisions, which will apply to both 900 and 8000 series heaters installed on certain airplanes:

—During each 250-hour inspection, more detailed actions will be required, namely inspection of the thermostat and upper limit switches and inspection of the solenoid valve and fuel pump.—At the same time as the 250-hour and installation inspection, a combustion heater pressure decay test (PDT) will be required. If the combustion heater fails the PDT, the operator will be required to replace the combustion tube.—Operators have the options of disabling the heater.

In the regulatory flexibility analysis for the SNPRM, the FAA estimated the total present value cost of compliance to be $6,020 for airplanes equipped with 8000 series Meggitt combustion heaters and $7,514 for airplanes equipped with 900 series Meggitt combustion heaters. The lower cost for airplanes with 8000 series combustion heaters reflects that 8000 series heaters are currently subject to the 250-hour inspection and installation inspection requirements, and, therefore, the incremental cost will be correspondingly less for airplanes with 8000 series combustion heaters compared to airplanes with 900 series heaters.

The airplanes equipped with the affected heaters are single- and twin-engine piston airplanes that, for the most part, were manufactured from the 1940s to the 1980s, and range in price from about $270,000 for a Cessna 421C Golden Eagle down to a price as low as $30,000 for a Piper 23-150 Apache. With a present value cost of about $6,000 for airplanes equipped with 8000 series Meggitt combustion heaters and a present value cost of about $7,500 for airplanes equipped with 900 series Meggitt combustion heaters, the FAA considers the cost impact to be significant for nearly all such airplanes.

6. A Description of the Steps the Agency Has Taken To Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities Consistent With the Stated Objectives of Applicable Statutes, Including a Statement of the Factual, Policy, and Legal Reasons for Selecting the Alternative Adopted in the Final Rule and Why Each One of the Other Significant Alternatives to the Rule Considered by the Agency Which Affect the Impact on Small Entities Was Rejected

The FAA considered allowing more flight hours or calendar time before requiring compliance, but this alternative would increase the risk of another fatal accident. This AD allows the combustion heater to be disconnected or removed, but, operating without a heater is unlikely to be viable. Because of an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on the airplanes identified in this AD, there is no feasible significant alternative to requiring the actions of this AD.

Accordingly, since airplanes equipped with Meggitt combustion heaters have values low enough to consider that airplane operators will incur a significant expense inspecting and testing the heaters, and since many of these airplanes are registered LLCs, LLPs and other company forms typically suited for single proprietors and small partnerships, the FAA therefore concludes that this AD will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Regulatory Findings

We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,

(2) Is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and

(4) Will have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

This AD was prompted by an airplane accident and reports we received that the combustion heater was malfunctioning. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct a hazardous condition caused by deterioration of the combustion heater, which could lead to ignition of components and result in smoke and fumes in the cabin.

(f) Compliance

Comply with this AD by doing one of the actions in paragraphs (f)(1), (2), or (3) of this AD at the compliance times indicated, unless already done. If the hours of combustion heater operation cannot be determined, use 50 percent of the airplane's hours time-in-service (TIS):

(1) Perform the actions specified in paragraphs (g) through (j) of this AD;

(2) Disable the heater following the instructions in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD; or

(3) Remove the heater following the instructions in paragraph (k)(2) of this AD.

Within the next 10 hours TIS of the combustion heater after May 5, 2017 (the effective date of this AD) or the next scheduled 100-hour inspection, annual inspection, or phase inspection that occurs 30 days after May 5, 2017 (the effective date of this AD), whichever occurs first, and repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 250 hours of combustion heater operation or two years, whichever occurs first, do the following inspections and PDT listed in paragraphs (g)(1) through (4) of this AD. You may do one of the actions in paragraph (k)(1) or (2) of this AD in lieu of doing the inspections required by paragraph (g).

(1) Inspections using the instructions in paragraph (i)(1) or (j) of this AD, as applicable.

(2) Inspections using the steps listed in paragraphs (g)(2)(i) through (v) of this AD:

(i) Inspect the thermostat switch (external from heater) and upper limit switch (located on the heater). In cold static condition, both switches should be in closed position; in operation (hot) condition, both switches should regulate their sensed temperatures within ± 10 degrees F.

(iii) With the heater operating, inspect the fuel pump output pressure for proper gauge hook up and pressure range readings.

(iv) Inspect the combustion heater's fuel pump operating pressure to assure it is not affected by other on-board pumps.

(v) Inspect the heater to assure it instantly responds to the on/off switch.

(3) Installation inspections and checks using the steps listed in paragraphs (g)(3)(i) through (iv) of this AD:

(i) Inspect ventilating air and combustion air inlets and exhaust outlet correcting any restrictions and ensure attachment security.

(ii) Inspect drain line and ensure it is free of obstruction.

(iii) Check all fuel lines for security at joints and shrouds, correcting/replacing those showing evidence of looseness or leakage.

(iv) Check all electrical wiring for security at attachment points, correcting conditions leading to arcing, chafing or looseness.

(4) Pressure decay test using the instructions in paragraph (i)(2) or (j) of this AD, as applicable.

(h) Replacement of the Heater Tube and/or Correction or Replacement of Other Assemblies

If any discrepancies are found during any of the inspections/PDTs required in paragraphs (g)(1), (2), (3), and/or (4) of this AD, before further flight, replace the defective heater tube and/or correct or replace other defective assemblies as necessary. You must use the instructions in paragraph (i) or (j) of this AD, as applicable, to do any necessary replacements. This AD does not allow repair of the combustion tube. You may do one of the actions in paragraph (k)(1) or (2) of this AD in lieu of doing the replacements required by paragraph (h).

(1) For the inspections required in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD and the replacement(s) that may be required in paragraph (h) of this AD, use the service information listed in paragraphs (i)(1)(i) through (iii) of this AD, as applicable, or do one of the actions in paragraph (k)(1) or (2) of this AD.

(2) For the PDT required in paragraph (g)(4) of this AD, use Meggitt Inspection Procedure, Pressure Decay Test, Aircraft Heaters, IP-347, dated May 17, 2014, or do one of the actions in paragraph (k)(1) or (2) of this AD.

(j) Procedures for Inspection, PDT, and Replacement for Models Other Than Models 8240, 8253, 8259, and 8472

This AD does not have referenced service information associated with the mandatory requirements of this AD for models other than Models 8240, 8253, 8259, and 8472. For the required inspections and PDT specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (4) of this AD and, if necessary, any replacement(s) specified in paragraph (h) of this AD, you must contact the manufacturer to obtain FAA-approved inspection, replacement, and PDT procedures approved specifically for this AD and implement those procedures through an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) or do one of the actions in paragraph (k)(1) or (2) of this AD. You may use the contact information found in paragraph (n)(2) to contact the manufacturer. Appendix 1 of this AD contains a listing of service information that provides specific instructions, for certain inspections and replacements, that you may use to apply for an AMOC following paragraph (m) of this AD. The service information listed in appendix 1 of this AD did not meet Office of the Federal Register regulatory requirements for incorporation by reference approval due to the condition of the documents. However, the listing in appendix 1 to this AD does not include any instructions for the PDT required in paragraph (g)(4) because these procedures do not exist.

(k) Disable or Removal of the Combustion Heater

As an option to the inspection, PDT, and replacement actions specified in paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, within the next 10 hours TIS of the combustion heater after the effective date of this AD or the next scheduled 100-hour inspection, annual inspection, or phase inspection that occurs 30 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, do one of the following actions:

(1) Disable the heater by the following actions:

(i) Disconnect and cap the heater fuel supply.

(ii) Disconnect circuit breakers.

(iii) Tag the main switch “Heater Inoperable.”

(iv) The ventilation blower can stay functional.

(v) If you re-enable the combustion heater, before further flight, you must perform the actions in paragraphs (f)(1) of this AD. If you cannot complete the actions of paragraph (f)(1) satisfactorily, you must perform the actions in either paragraph (f)(2) or (3) of this AD.

(2) Remove the heater by the following actions:

(i) Disconnect and cap the heater fuel supply.

(ii) Disconnect/remove circuit breakers.

(iii) Remove exhaust pipe extension;.

(iv) Cap the exhaust opening.

(v) Remove the heater.

(vi) Do weight and balance for the aircraft.

(vii) If you install an applicable combustion heater on the airplane, before further flight, you must perform the actions in paragraphs (f)(1) of this AD. If you cannot complete the actions of paragraph (f)(1) satisfactorily, you must perform the actions in either paragraph (f)(2) or (3) of this AD.

(l) Special Flight Permit

Special flight permits are permitted in accordance with 14 CFR 39.23 with the following limitation: Use of the heater is not allowed.

(m) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

(1) The Manager, Chicago Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (o)(1) of this AD.

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

(3) AMOCs approved for AD 81-09-09 (46 FR 24936, May 4, 1981) are not approved as AMOCs for this AD.

(4) You may view this service information at FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (816) 329-4148.

(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

Appendix 1 to AD 2017-06-03

The following service information applies to certain combustion heater models affected by this AD, but the service information cannot be required by the AD. You may use this service information for procedural guidance when applying for an alternative method of compliance.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (the Commission) is adopting revisions to the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval System (EDGAR) Filer Manual and related rules to reflect updates to the EDGAR system. The updates are being made primarily to support the new online version of the Transfer Agent submission form types; provide for the ability for filers to submit duplicate filings for submission form type 10-D; and provide for the ability for filers to upload the notarized authentication document and the power of attorney as separate CORRESP documents when submitting a request to manually update their EDGAR filing passphrase. The EDGAR system was upgraded to support the US GAAP 2017 Taxonomy on March 6, 2016. The EDGAR system is scheduled to be upgraded to support the other functionalities on March 13, 2017.

DATES:

Effective March 31, 2017. The incorporation by reference of the EDGAR Filer Manual is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of March 31, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

In the Division of Corporation Finance, for questions concerning Form ABS-EE and Regulation A submission form types, contact Vik Sheth at (202) 551-3818; in the Division of Trading and Markets, for questions concerning Form TA and Form X-17A-5, contact Kathy Bateman at (202) 551-4345; in the Office of Investment Management, for questions concerning Form N-MFP, contact Heather Fernandez at (202) 551-6708; and in the Division of Economic and Risk Analysis, for questions concerning eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL), contact Walter Hamscher at (202) 551-5397.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

We are adopting an updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I and Volume II. The Filer Manual describes the technical formatting requirements for the preparation and submission of electronic filings through the EDGAR system.1 It also describes the requirements for filing using EDGARLink Online and the Online Forms/XML Web site.

1 We originally adopted the Filer Manual on April 1, 1993, with an effective date of April 26, 1993. Release No. 33-6986 (April 1, 1993) [58 FR 18638]. We implemented the most recent update to the Filer Manual on January 30, 2017. See Release No. 33-10295 (February 08, 2017) [82 FR 9680].

The Filer Manual contains all the technical specifications for filers to submit filings using the EDGAR system. Filers must comply with the applicable provisions of the Filer Manual in order to assure the timely acceptance and processing of filings made in electronic format.2 Filers may consult the Filer Manual in conjunction with our rules governing mandated electronic filing when preparing documents for electronic submission.3

2See Rule 301 of Regulation S-T (17 CFR 232.301).

3See Release No. 33-10295 in which we implemented EDGAR Release 17.0.2. For additional history of Filer Manual rules, please see the citations therein.

The EDGAR system will be upgraded to Release 17.1 on March 13, 2017 and will introduce the following changes:

The Microsoft InfoPath templates used to file Transfer Agent forms TA-1, TA-1/A, TA-2, TA-2/A, and TA-W will be retired on March 10, 2017. Effective March 13, 2017, filers must use the new online version of the forms application available on the EDGAR Filing Web site to file Transfer Agent forms. This web-based application will replace the corresponding Microsoft InfoPath templates that were previously used to file these forms. Filers will no longer need to purchase the 3rd party InfoPath application (which has been discontinued by Microsoft) in order to file the Transfer Agent forms. Filers can access Transfer Agent forms by selecting the `File Transfer Agent Forms' link on the EDGAR Filing Web site.

Chapter 8 (Preparing and Transmitting EDGARLite Submissions) of the “EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: EDGAR Filing” will be retired. Two new sections, `File Transfer Agent Forms' and `Completing a Transfer Agent Form' will be added to the former Chapter 9 (new Chapter 8—Preparing and Transmitting Online Submissions) of the “EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: EDGAR Filing” to guide filers through the filing process.

Filers can continue to construct XML submissions as described in the XML Technical Specification documents for Transfer Agent forms, and submit them via the EDGAR Filing Web site.

EDGAR will be updated to allow filers to submit duplicate filings for submission form type 10-D. The 10-D distribution reports for ABS entities can have multiple deals in which each deal will report on the 10-D generating a CIK with multiple reports for the same period.

EDGAR will be upgraded to allow filers to provide up to four digits after the decimal point for the “Price per security” field for submission form types DOS, DOS/A, 1-A, 1-A/A, 1-A POS, 1-K, 1-K/A, 1-Z, and 1-Z/A.

EDGAR will be upgraded to include the following changes to ABS-EE and ABS-EE/A:

• The restriction on future dates for ABS-EE and ABS-EE/A in the “End Period Date” EDGAR Header Tag will be removed.

• ABS-EE filings will be suspended if the EX-102 XML attachment fails validation.

• In addition, the ABS-EE Asset Data schema will be updated with the following changes:

Filers will be able to provide future dates through December 31, 2150 in response to Asset Class Items that require a date.

For more information, see the updated “EDGAR ABS XML Technical Specification” document available on the SEC's Public Web site (https://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/tech-specs).

Filers will be able to provide underscores (“_”) in any portion of the “Notification Email Address” and “Submission Contact Email Address” fields within X-17A-5 and X-17A-5/A submissions. In addition, all ASCII character validations will be removed for broker-dealer entity name fields for submission form types X-17A-5 and X-17A-5/A. Broker-dealers can submit the aforementioned filings, irrespective of the ASCII characters in those fields.

Submission form types SDR, SDR/A, SDR-A, and SDR-W will no longer require the XBRL dei:EntityFilerCategory element to be provided to enable the following XBRL document Types to pass validation:

• EX-99.SDR K.INS (Traditional XBRL).

• EX-99.SDR L.INS (Traditional XBRL).

• EX-99.SDR K (Inline XBRL).

• EX-99.SDR L (Inline XBRL).

Submission types N-MFP2 and N-MFP2/A will be updated to allow filers to choose both “Exempt Government” and “Treasury” as the category of the fund in Item A.10 of the form. For more information, see the updated “EDGAR Form N-MFP2 XML Technical Specification” document located on the SEC's Public Web site (https://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/tech-specs).

Filers will now be able to upload the notarized authentication document and the power of attorney as separate CORRESP documents when submitting a request to manually update their passphrase on the EDGAR Filer Management Web site (https://www.filermanagement.edgarfiling.sec.gov).

On March 6, 2017, the EDGAR system was upgraded to Release 17.0.3 and now supports the US GAAP 2017 Taxonomy; and updated SEC taxonomies COUNTRY, CURRENCY, EXCH and NAICS. Please see https://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/edgartaxonomies.shtml for a complete listing of supported standard taxonomies. Taxonomy Disclosure Templates have been made available to be used as part of the filer's extension taxonomy based on examples in the Taxonomy Implementation Guides. Please see Release Notes for US GAAP 2017 for more details.

Along with the adoption of the Filer Manual, we are amending Rule 301 of Regulation S-T to provide for the incorporation by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations of today's revisions. This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

The updated EDGAR Filer Manual will be available for Web site viewing and printing; the address for the Filer Manual is https://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/edmanuals.htm. You may also obtain paper copies of the EDGAR Filer Manual from the following address: Public Reference Room, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.

Since the Filer Manual and the corresponding rule changes relate solely to agency procedures or practice, publication for notice and comment is not required under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).4 It follows that the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act 5 do not apply.

4 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A).

5 5 U.S.C. 601-612.

The effective date for the updated Filer Manual and the rule amendments is March 31, 2017. In accordance with the APA,6 we find that there is good cause to establish an effective date less than 30 days after publication of these rules. The EDGAR system upgrade to Release 17.1 is scheduled to become available on March 13, 2017. The Commission believes that establishing an effective date less than 30 days after publication of these rules is necessary to coordinate the effectiveness of the updated Filer Manual with these system upgrades.

6 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).

Statutory Basis

We are adopting the amendments to Regulation S-T under Sections 6, 7, 8, 10, and 19(a) of the Securities Act of 1933,7 Sections 3, 12, 13, 14, 15, 23, and 35A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,8 Section 319 of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939,9 and Sections 8, 30, 31, and 38 of the Investment Company Act of 1940.10

Filers must prepare electronic filings in the manner prescribed by the EDGAR Filer Manual, promulgated by the Commission, which sets out the technical formatting requirements for electronic submissions. The requirements for becoming an EDGAR Filer and updating company data are set forth in the updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume I: “General Information,” Version 27 (March 2017). The requirements for filing on EDGAR are set forth in the updated EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II: “EDGAR Filing,” Version 41 (March 2017). All of these provisions have been incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations, which action was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You must comply with these requirements in order for documents to be timely received and accepted. The EDGAR Filer Manual is available for Web site viewing and printing; the address for the Filer Manual is https://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/edmanuals.htm. You can obtain paper copies of the EDGAR Filer Manual from the following address: Public Reference Room, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. You can also inspect the document at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

The Coast Guard is establishing a special local regulation on the waters of San Juan Harbor in San Juan, Puerto Rico during the 2017 Cataño Offshore, a high-speed race event. The special local regulation is necessary to ensure the safety of race participants, participant vessels, spectators, and the general public during the event. This regulation establishes three regulated areas: A race area; a buffer zone; and a spectator area. This special local regulation prohibits non-participant persons and vessels from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the race area or buffer zone and prohibits vessels from transiting at speeds that cause wake within the spectator area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port San Juan or a designated representative.

DATES:

This rule is effective from 11:00 a.m. through 4 p.m. on April 2, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2017-0255 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

I. Table of AbbreviationsCFR Code of Federal RegulationsDHS Department of Homeland SecurityFR Federal RegisterNPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking§ Section U.S.C. United States CodeCOTP Captain of the PortII. Background Information and Regulatory History

The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because the Coast Guard did not receive the required event documentation until March 22, 2017, leaving insufficient time before the event to publish an NPRM and to receive public comment in order to complete the rulemaking process. For that reason, it would be impracticable to publish an NPRM.

For the reason discussed above, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

The legal basis for this rule is the Coast Guard's authority to establish special local regulations is 33 U.S.C. 1233. The purpose of the rule is to ensure safety of the event participants, the general public, and the navigable waters of San Juan Harbor in the vicinity of San Juan, Puerto Rico during the 2017 Cataño Offshore race event.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

This rule establishes a special local regulation on certain waters of San Juan Harbor in San Juan, Puerto Rico during the 2017 Cataño Offshore race event. The race is scheduled to take place from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. on April 2, 2017. Approximately 30 high-speed boats and personal watercraft are expected to participate in the race. The special local regulation will create three regulated areas: (1) A race area; (2) a buffer zone; and (3) a spectator area. Within the race area and buffer zone, non-participant persons and vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the regulated area without obtaining permission from the COTP San Juan or a designated representative. Within the spectator area, all persons and vessels are prohibited from traveling in excess of wake speed without obtaining permission from the COTP San Juan or a designated representative. If authorization is granted by the COTP San Juan or a designated representative, all persons and vessels receiving such authorization must comply with the instructions of the COTP San Juan or a designated representative. The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated areas by Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, or by on-scene designated representatives.

V. Regulatory Analyses

We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive Orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

E.O.s 12866 (“Regulatory Planning and Review”) and 13563 (“Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review”) direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity. E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. Executive Order 13771 (“Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs”), directs agencies to reduce regulation and control regulatory costs and provides that “for every one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process.”

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this rule a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not reviewed it.

The economic impact of this rule is not significant for the following reasons: (1) The special local regulation will be enforced for only five hours; (2) although persons and vessels may not enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the race area without authorization from the COTP San Juan or a designated representative, the vessel traffic will be able to safely transit around the regulated areas, which will impact certain waters of San Juan Harbor in San Juan, Puerto Rico; (3) persons and vessels would still be able to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the race area and buffer zone or transit in excess of wake speed in the spectator zone if authorized by the COTP San Juan or a designated representative; and (4) the Coast Guard will provide advance notice of the special local regulation to the local maritime community by Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, or by on-scene designated representatives.

B. Impact on Small Entities

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the special local regulation may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.

Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.

Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a special local regulation that will prohibit non-participant persons and vessels from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within a limited race area and will also prohibit persons and vessels from transiting at more than wake speed within a limited spectator area during a race event lasting five hours. This rule is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(h) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

G. Protest Activities

The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels.

(a) Location. The following regulated areas are established as a special local regulation. All coordinates are North American Datum 1983.

(1) Race area. All waters of San Juan Harbor encompassed within an imaginary line connecting the following points: Starting at Point 1 in position 18°27.915′ N., 066°07.756′ W.; thence south to Point 2 in position 18°27.164′ N., 066°07.634′ W.; thence south to Point 3 in position 18°26.875′ N., 066°07.451′ W.; thence east to Point 4 in position 18°26.938′ N., 066°06.645′ W.; thence northeast to point 5 in position 18°27.069′ N., 066°06.535′ W.; thence northwest to point 6 in position 18°28.005′ N., 066°07.628′ W.; thence southwest back to origin.

(2) Buffer zone. All waters of San Juan Harbor encompassed within an imaginary line connecting the following points: Starting at Point 1 in position 18°28.170′ N., 066°07.588′ W.; thence west to Point 2 in position 18°27.943′ N., 066°08.010′ W.; thence south to Point 3 in position 18°27.132′ N., 066°07.734′ W.; thence south to Point 4 in position 18°26.733′ N., 066°07.488′ W.; thence east to point 5 in position 18°26.768′ N., 066°06.578′ W.; thence northeast to point 6 in position 18°27.168′ N., 066°06.357′ W.; thence northwest to Point 7 in position 18°27.510′ N., 066°06.954′ W.; thence northwest to Point 8 in position 18°27.611′ N., 066°07.098′ W.; thence north to Point 9 in position 18°27.779′ N., 066°07.123′ W.; thence northwest to point 10 in position 18°27.846′ N., 066°07.182′ W.; thence north to point 11 in position 18°27.924′ N., 066°07.190′ W.; thence northwest to Point 12 in position 18°27.961′ N., 066°07.256′ W.; thence southwest to Point 13 in position 18°27.952′ N., 066°07.312′ W.; thence northwest to Point 14 in position 18°27.967′ N., 066°07.343′ W.; thence north to point 15 in position 18°28.003′ N., 066°07.335′ W.; thence northwest to point 16 in position 18°28.071′ N., 066°07.399′ W.; thence southwest to Point 17 in position 18°28.055′ N., 066°07.433′ W.; thence northwest back to origin.

(3) Spectator area. All waters of San Juan Harbor excluding the race area and buffer zone, encompassed within an imaginary line connecting the following points: Starting at Point 1 in position 18°26.933′ N., 066°07.824′ W.; thence southeast to Point 2 in position 18°26.705′ N., 066°07.648′ W.; thence northwest back to origin.

(b) Definition. The term “designated representative” means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and Federal, State, and Local officers designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port San Juan in the enforcement of the regulated areas.

(c) Regulations. (1) All non-participant persons and vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the race area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port San Juan or a designated representative.

(2) All non-participant persons and vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the buffer zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port San Juan or a designated representative.

(3) All persons and vessels are prohibited from transiting in excess of wake speed in the spectator area, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port San Juan or a designated representative.

(4) Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through, anchor in, remain within or transit in excess of wake speed within any of the regulated areas may contact the Captain of the Port San Juan by telephone at (787) 289-2041, or a designated representative via VHF-FM radio on channel 16 to request authorization. If authorization is granted, all persons and vessels receiving such authorization must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port San Juan or a designated representative.

(5) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated areas by Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, or by on-scene designated representatives.

(d) Enforcement period. This rule will be enforced with actual notice from 11 a.m. until 4 p.m. on April 2, 2017, unless sooner terminated by the Captain of the Port San Juan.

The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the SR 529 highway bridges, north and south bound, across the Snohomish River, mile 3.6 near Everett, WA, and the SR 529 highway bridges, north and south bound, across Steamboat Slough, mile 1.1 and 1.2, near Marysville, WA. This deviation is necessary to accommodate the Everett Half Marathon run event. The deviation allows the bridges to remain in the closed-to-navigation position during the marathon to allow safe movement of event participants.

DATES:

This deviation is effective from 7:30 a.m. to 11 a.m. on April 9, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

The docket for this deviation, USCG-2017-0155 is available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this deviation.

The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) has requested that the SR 529 highway bridges, north bound and south bound, across the Snohomish River and Steamboat Slough remain in the closed-to-navigation position to facilitate safe, uninterrupted roadway passage of participants of the Everett Half Marathon. The SR 529 highway bridges over the Snohomish River at mile 3.6 provides 37 feet of vertical clearance above mean high water elevation while in the closed position. These bridges operate in accordance with 33 CFR 117.1059(c). The SR 529 highway bridges over Steamboat Slough at mile 1.1 and 1.2 provides 10 feet of vertical clearance above mean high water elevation while in the closed position. These bridges operate in accordance with 33 CFR 117.1059(g). This deviation allows the SR 529 bridges crossing the Snohomish River and Steamboat Slough to remain in the closed-to navigation position, and need not open for maritime traffic, from 7:30 a.m. to 11 a.m. on April 9, 2017. The bridges shall operate in accordance to 33 CFR 117.1059 at all other times.

Vessels able to pass through the bridges in the closed-to-navigation position may do so at any time. The bridges will be required to open, if needed, for vessels engaged in emergency response operations during this closure period. Waterway usage on this part of the Snohomish River and Steamboat Slough includes vessels ranging from commercial tug and barge to small pleasure craft. An alternate route for vessels to pass is available through Ebey Slough and Union Slough near the entrance of Steamboat Slough at high tide. A request for comment with any objections to this deviation was advertised in the Local Notice to Mariners, and none was received. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridges so that vessels can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.

In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridges must return to their regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Hawthorne Bridge, mile 13, crossing the Willamette River at Portland, OR. This deviation is necessary to accommodate the Cinco de Mayo 5K event. The deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position to allow safe roadway movement of event participants.

DATES:

This deviation is effective from 8 a.m. to 11:15 a.m. on May 7, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

The docket for this deviation, USCG-2017-0246 is available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this deviation.

Multnomah County has requested a temporary deviation from the operating schedule for the Hawthorne Bridge, mile 13.1 crossing the Willamette River at Portland, OR. The requested deviation is to accommodate the Cinco de Mayo 5K event. To facilitate this event, the draw of this bridge will be allowed to be kept in the closed-to-navigation position to marine traffic from 8 a.m. to 11:15 a.m. on May 7, 2017. The Hawthorne Bridge provides a vertical clearance of 49 feet in the closed-to-navigation position referenced to the vertical clearance above Columbia River Datum 0.0. The normal operating schedule is in 33 CFR 117.897. Waterway usage on this part of the Willamette River includes vessels ranging from commercial tug and barge to small pleasure craft. The Coast Guard contacted all known users of the Willamette River for comment, and we received no objections for this deviation.

Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed-to-navigation position may do so at any time. The bridge will be able to open for emergencies, and there is no immediate alternate route for vessels to pass. The Coast Guard will inform the users of the waterway, through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners, of the change in operating schedule for the bridges so that vessels can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.

In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to its regular operating schedules immediately at the end of the effective period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

The U.S. Coast Guard is establishing a temporary moving safety zone in the Port of Long Beach around the M/V ZHEN HUA 28. This temporary safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the waterway users and the M/V ZHEN HUA 28 during the vessel's transit into the Port Long Beach, its stay at Long Beach Container Terminal (LBCT), and its outbound transit departing LBCT. Entry of persons or vessels into this temporary safety zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port, Los Angeles-Long Beach, or her designated representative.

DATES:

This rule is effective without actual notice from March 31, 2017, to 11:00 p.m. on April 14, 2017. For purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from 12 a.m. on March 25, 2017, through March 31, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2017-0237 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule. Publishing an NPRM would be impracticable in this case due to having received initial notice of the event on March 13, 2017.

We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register for the reasons stated above.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The Captain of the Port (COTP), Los Angeles-Long Beach has determined that potential hazards associated with navigation safety that arise because of the potentially hazardous condition of the cranes onboard the M/V ZHEN HUA 28 and the vessel's limited ability to maneuver. This temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of, and reduce the risk to, the public, and mariners, in the Port of Long Beach.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

This rule establishes a temporary safety zone from 12:00 a.m. on March 25, 2017, to 11:00 p.m. on April 14, 2017, encompassing all navigable waters from the surface to the sea floor within 200 yards of the M/V ZHEN HUA 28 while the vessel is underway and 100 yards while moored or at anchor, while cranes remain onboard the vessel. This temporary moving safety zone will only be enforced during the vessel's transit from the Long Beach Pilot Operating Area outside of the federal breakwater into port to LBCT, while at anchor or at berth while cranes remain onboard the vessel, and the vessel's outbound transit departing LBCT to the Long Beach Pilot Operating Area.

No vessel or person is permitted to operate in the safety zone without obtaining permission from the Captain of the Port (COTP) or the COTP's designated representative. Sector Los Angeles-Long Beach may be contacted on VHF-FM Channel 16 or 310-521-3801. The general boating public will be notified prior to the enforcement of the temporary moving safety zone via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

V. Regulatory Analyses

We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders (E.O.s) related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and E.O.s, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

E.O.s 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under E.O. 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.

This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, and duration of the safety zone. The size of the zone is the minimum necessary to provide adequate protection for the waterways users, adjoining areas, and the public. The zone will be in place during the scheduled vessel transit to LBCT, while at berth offloading cranes, and during the scheduled vessel departure from LBCT. Any hardships experienced by persons or vessels are considered minimal compared to the interest in protecting the public.

B. Impact on Small Entities

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator. Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

A rule has implications for federalism under E.O. 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in E.O. 13132.

Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under E.O. 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

G. Protest Activities

The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels.

(a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable waters from the surface to the sea floor within a 200 yard radius of the M/V ZHEN HUA 28 while transiting and 100 yard radius while moored or at anchor. This temporary moving safety zone will only be enforced during the vessel's transit from the Long Beach Pilot Operating Area outside of the federal breakwater into port to LBCT, while at anchor or at berth while cranes remain onboard the vessel, and the vessel's outbound transit departing LBCT to the Long Beach Pilot Operating Area.

(b) Definitions. For the purposes of this section:

Designated representative means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Los Angeles-Long Beach (COTP) in the enforcement of the safety zone.

(c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.

(2) To seek permission to enter, hail Coast Guard Sector Los Angeles-Long Beach on VHF-FM Channel 16 or call at (310) 521-3801. Those in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.

(d) Enforcement period. This section is effective beginning at 12:00 a.m. on March 25, 2017, to 11:00 p.m. on April 14, 2017. This rule will be enforced during the vessel's transit from the Long Beach Pilot Operating Area outside of the federal breakwater into port to LBCT, while at anchor or at berth while cranes remain onboard the vessel and the vessel's transit departing LBCT to the Long Beach Pilot Operating Area. The general boating public will be notified prior to the enforcement of the temporary moving safety zone via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

This proposed rule would implement a recommendation from the Far West Spearmint Oil Administrative Committee (Committee) to establish the quantity of spearmint oil produced in the Far West, by class, that handlers may purchase from, or handle on behalf of, producers during the 2017-2018 marketing year, which begins on June 1, 2017. The Far West production area includes the states of Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and designated parts of Nevada and Utah. The Committee locally administers the marketing order and is comprised of spearmint oil producers operating within the area of production, and a public member. This action would establish salable quantities and allotment percentages for Class 1 (Scotch) spearmint oil of 774,645 pounds and 36 percent, respectively, and for Class 3 (Native) spearmint oil of 1,075,051 pounds and 44 percent, respectively. The Committee recommended these salable quantities and allotment percentages to help maintain stability in the spearmint oil market.

DATES:

Comments must be received by May 1, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning this proposal. Comments must be sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Fax: (202) 720-8938; or Internet: http://www.regulations.gov. All comments should reference the document number and the date and page number of this issue of the Federal Register and will be made available for public inspection in the Office of the Docket Clerk during regular business hours, or can be viewed at: http://www.regulations.gov. All comments submitted in response to this proposal will be included in the record and will be made available to the public. Please be advised that the identity of the individuals or entities submitting the comments will be made public on the internet at the address provided above.

This proposal is issued under Marketing Order No. 985 (7 CFR part 985), as amended, regulating the handling of spearmint oil produced in the Far West (Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and designated parts of Nevada and Utah), hereinafter referred to as the “order.” The order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the “Act.”

The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is issuing this proposed rule in conformance with Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13175.

This proposal has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This proposed rule is not intended to have retroactive effect. Under the order now in effect, salable quantities and allotment percentages may be established for classes of spearmint oil produced in the Far West. This proposed rule would establish the quantity of spearmint oil produced in the Far West, by class, which handlers may purchase from, or handle on behalf of, producers during the 2017-2018 marketing year, which begins on June 1, 2017.

The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order may file with USDA a petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. A handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. After the hearing, USDA would rule on the petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review USDA's ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.

The Committee meets annually in the fall to adopt a marketing policy for the ensuing marketing year or years. In determining such marketing policy, the Committee considers a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the current and projected supply, estimated future demand, production costs, and producer prices for all classes of spearmint oil. Input from spearmint oil handlers and producers regarding prospective marketing conditions for the upcoming year is considered as well.

If the Committee's marketing policy considerations indicate a need for regulating the quantity of any or all classes of spearmint oil marketed, the Committee subsequently recommends to USDA the establishment of a salable quantity and allotment percentage for such class or classes of oil in the forthcoming marketing year. Recommendations for volume regulation are intended to ensure that market requirements for Far West spearmint oil are satisfied and orderly marketing conditions are maintained.

The salable quantity represents the total amount of each class of spearmint oil that handlers may purchase from, or handle on behalf of, producers during the marketing year. The allotment percentage is the percentage used to calculate each producer's prorated share of the salable quantity. It is derived by dividing the salable quantity for each class of spearmint oil by the total of all producers' allotment bases for the same class of oil. Each producer's annual allotment of salable spearmint oil is calculated by multiplying their respective total allotment base by the allotment percentage for each class of spearmint oil. A producer's allotment base is their quantified share of the spearmint oil market based on a statistical representation of past spearmint oil production, with accommodation for reasonable, normal adjustments to such base as prescribed by the Committee and approved by USDA.

Salable quantities and allotment percentages are established at levels intended to fulfill market requirements and to maintain orderly marketing conditions. Committee recommendations for volume regulation are made well in advance of the period in which the regulations are to be effective, thereby allowing producers the chance to adjust their production decisions accordingly.

Pursuant to authority in §§ 985.50, 985.51, and 985.52 of the order, the full eight-member Committee met on October 19, 2016, and recommended salable quantities and allotment percentages for both classes of oil for the 2017-2018 marketing year. By a vote of 6-2, the Committee recommended the establishment of a salable quantity and allotment percentage for Scotch spearmint oil of 774,645 pounds and 36 percent, respectively. The two Committee members that voted in opposition to the recommendation both supported volume regulation, but at higher levels than were proposed. They felt that a nearly 20 percent year-over-year reduction in the salable quantity and allotment percentage for Scotch spearmint oil was too severe.

For Native spearmint oil, with a unanimous vote (7-0, with the public member abstaining), the Committee recommended the establishment of a salable quantity and allotment percentage of 1,075,051 pounds and 44 percent, respectively. Pursuant to § 985.29(a), seven members of the Committee constitute a quorum, and six concurring votes are required to pass a motion.

This action would set the amount of Scotch and Native spearmint oil that handlers may purchase from, or handle on behalf of, producers during the 2017-2018 marketing year, which begins on June 1, 2017. Salable quantities and allotment percentages have been placed into effect each season since the order's inception in 1980.

Class 1 (Scotch) Spearmint Oil

As noted above, the Committee recommended a salable quantity of Scotch spearmint oil of 774,645 pounds and an allotment percentage of 36 percent for the upcoming 2017-2018 marketing year. To arrive at these recommendations, the Committee utilized 2017-2018 sales estimates for Scotch spearmint oil, as provided by several of the industry handlers, historical and current Scotch spearmint oil production, inventory statistics, and international market data obtained from consultants for the spearmint oil industry.

The trade demand estimate for Far West Scotch spearmint oil was revised during the 2016-2017 marketing year from an initial estimate of 900,000 pounds to the current estimate of 950,000 pounds. Trade demand is expected to decrease from the 950,000 pounds anticipated in the 2016-2017 marketing year to 925,000 pounds in the 2017-2018 marketing year. Industry reports indicate that the decreased trade demand estimate is the result of decreased consumer demand for spearmint-flavored products, especially chewing gum in China and India, as fruit flavors are becoming preferential to consumers. In addition, better than expected production of spearmint oil in competing markets, most notably Canada and the U.S. Midwest, have also factored into the Committee's assessment of the market.

Production of Far West Scotch spearmint oil declined from 1,229,258 pounds in 2015 to an estimated 1,113,346 pounds in 2016. Production over the last three seasons has exceeded sales, leading to a gradual build in the salable carry-in of Scotch spearmint oil. Scotch spearmint oil held in the reserve pool, which was completely depleted at the beginning of the 2014-2015 marketing year, has also been gradually increasing over the past three years.

Carry-in represents the amount of salable spearmint oil produced, but not marketed, in a previous year or years that is available for sale in the current year under a previous year's annual allotment. Under volume regulation, spearmint oil that is designated as salable continues to be available to the market until it is sold and may be marketed at any time at the discretion of the owner. Spearmint oil held in reserve, however, is spearmint oil that has been produced in excess of a producer's marketing year allotment that can only be released into the market under certain circumstances.

Salable carry-in is the primary measure of excess spearmint oil supply under the order as it represents overproduction in prior years that is currently available to the market without restriction. Spearmint oil held in the reserve pool is a lesser indicator of excess supply, as it is spearmint oil that is not available to the market in the current marketing year without an increase in the salable quantity and allotment percentage.

The Committee estimates that there will be 174,507 pounds of salable carry-in of Scotch spearmint oil on June 1, 2017. If correct, this figure would be up 8,739 pounds from the 165,768 pounds carried in the previous year on June 1, 2016. The Committee estimates that salable carry-in will decrease to 24,152 pounds at the beginning of the 2018-2019 marketing year, if current market conditions and projections are maintained.

This anticipated level of carry-in (24,152 pounds) would be below the quantity that the Committee considers favorable (generally 150,000 pounds). However, the Committee believes that this lower salable carry-in is manageable given the strong production of spearmint in the current marketing year and the quantity of Scotch spearmint oil held in the reserve pool that could be released into the market if the industry experiences an unexpected increase in demand.

The Committee reported that there was 15,937 pounds of Scotch spearmint oil held in the reserve pool as of May 31, 2016. The Committee expects the reserve pool to increase to 204,691 pounds by May 31, 2017. This quantity of reserve oil should be an adequate buffer to supply the market if necessary.

The Committee estimates the total available supply of Scotch oil for the 2017-2018 marketing year to be 949,152 pounds (174,507 pounds of estimated carry-in plus 774,645 pounds of recommended salable quantity). The 2017-2018 Scotch spearmint oil salable quantity of 774,645 pounds recommended by the Committee represents a decrease of 184,066 pounds from the salable quantity established the previous marketing year (958,711 pounds).

The Committee estimates the 2017-2018 marketing year trade demand for Scotch spearmint oil at 925,000 pounds. As stated previously, the Committee expects that there will be 174,507 pounds of available carry-in of Scotch spearmint oil on June 1, 2017. That carry-in, when combined with the recommended 2017-2018 marketing year salable quantity of 774,645 pounds, would result in a total supply of 949,152 pounds of Scotch spearmint oil for the 2017-2018 marketing year. This quantity of Scotch spearmint oil is expected to fully satisfy estimated market demand of 925,000 pounds and is estimated to leave 24,152 pounds as carry-out for the 2017-2018 marketing year to be used as carry-in for the 2018-2019 marketing year.

The Committee's stated intent in the use of marketing order volume regulation provisions for Scotch spearmint oil is to keep adequate supplies available to meet market needs and maintain orderly marketing conditions. The recommended salable quantity of Scotch spearmint oil for the upcoming marketing year is less than the salable quantity established for the previous year. Even so, the Committee expects that the market will be fully supplied for the 2017-2018 marketing year.

The Committee believes that the recommended salable quantity would adequately meet demand, as well as result in a reasonable carry-in for the following year. The Committee developed its recommendation for the proposed Scotch spearmint oil salable quantity and allotment percentage for the 2017-2018 marketing year based on the information discussed above, as well as the computational data outlined below.

(A) Estimated carry-in of Scotch spearmint oil on June 1, 2017: 174,507 pounds. This figure is the difference between the revised 2016-2017 marketing year total available supply of 1,124,507 pounds and the revised 2016-2017 marketing year estimated trade demand of 950,000 pounds.

(B) Estimated trade demand of Scotch spearmint oil for the 2017-2018 marketing year: 925,000 pounds. This figure was established at the Committee meeting held on October 19, 2016. The average estimated trade demand derived from six production area producer meetings held prior to the main meeting on October 19, 2016, was 960,400, which is 8,000 pounds more than the average of trade demand estimates submitted by handlers (952,400 pounds). Far West Scotch spearmint oil sales have averaged 1,021,786 pounds per year over the last three years, and 987,639 pounds over the last five years. Given the anticipated market conditions for the coming year, the Committee decided it was prudent to anticipate the lower trade demand at 925,000 pounds. Should the initially established volume regulation levels prove insufficient to adequately supply the market, the Committee has the authority to recommend intra-seasonal increases, as were undertaken in the 2014-2015 marketing year and several other previous marketing years.

(C) Salable quantity of Scotch spearmint oil required from the 2017-2018 marketing year production: 750,493 pounds. This figure is the difference between the estimated 2017-2018 marketing year trade demand (925,000 pounds) and the estimated carry-in on June 1, 2017 (174,507 pounds). This salable quantity represents the minimum amount of Scotch spearmint oil that may be needed to satisfy estimated demand for the coming year.

(D) Total estimated allotment base of Scotch spearmint oil for the 2017-2018 marketing year: 2,151,792 pounds. This figure represents a one-percent increase over the 2016-2017 total allotment base of 2,130,487 pounds as prescribed by the order under § 985.53(d)(1). The one-percent increase equals 21,305 pounds of Scotch spearmint oil. This total estimated allotment base is generally revised each year on June 1 due to producer base being lost because of the bona fide effort production provisions of § 985.53(e). The adjustment is usually minimal.

(F) Recommended Scotch spearmint oil allotment percentage for the 2017-2018 marketing year: 36 percent. This is the Committee's recommendation and is based on the computed allotment percentage (34.9 percent), and input from producers and handlers at the October 19, 2016, meeting. The recommended 36 percent allotment percentage reflects the Committee's belief that the computed percentage (34.9 percent) may not adequately supply the potential 2017-2018 Scotch spearmint oil market demand.

(G) Recommended Scotch spearmint oil salable quantity for the 2017-2018 marketing year: 774,645 pounds. This figure is the product of the recommended salable allotment percentage (36 percent) and the total estimated allotment base (2,151,792 pounds) for the 2017-2018 marketing year.

(H) Estimated total available supply of Scotch spearmint oil for the 2017-2018 marketing year: 949,152 pounds. This figure is the sum of the 2017-2018 recommended salable quantity (774,645 pounds) and the estimated carry-in on June 1, 2017 (174,507 pounds).

Class 3 (Native) Spearmint Oil

The Committee also recommended a 2017-2018 Native spearmint oil salable quantity of 1,075,051 pounds and an allotment percentage of 44 percent at the October 19, 2016, meeting. These figures represent a decrease of 134,495 pounds and 6 percent, respectively, from the salable quantity and allotment percentage established for the previous marketing year. To formulate this recommendation, the Committee utilized Native spearmint oil sales estimates for the 2017-2018 marketing year, as provided by several of the industry's handlers, as well as historical and current Native spearmint oil market statistics.

The Committee estimates that there will be 1,094,659 pounds of Native spearmint oil in the reserve pool on June 1, 2017. This figure, which is the excess Native spearmint oil production held in reserve by producers, is 499,305 pounds higher than the reserve pool held by producers on June 1, 2016. This would be the highest reserve pool level since 2004. Reserve pool levels of Native spearmint oil had been slowly moving toward the level that the Committee believes is optimal for the industry prior to the increases experienced in 2015 and 2016. The large year-over-year increase in Native spearmint oil held in reserve (84 percent) is the result of substantially increased production and only moderately increased industry trade demand.

Far West Native spearmint oil production was estimated at 1,510,936 pounds in 2015, compared to 1,694,684 pounds estimated for 2016. Although total estimated acres of Native spearmint production decreased by 164 acres, yield per acre has risen from 145.8 in 2015 to 166.2 pounds per acre this year. Conversely, sales of Native spearmint oil, which were increasing at about a 4 percent rate from 2009 to 2014, dropped by 12 percent for the 2015-2016 marketing year.

Despite Committee statistics that indicate a sharp drop for Far West Native spearmint oil sales from the previous marketing year (2015-2016), monthly sales, to date, for the 2016-2017 marketing year have been moderately stronger. The Committee expects this trend to continue, even as imports of spearmint oil are also rising. Canada more than doubled its shipments of spearmint oil into the U.S. market from 2014 to 2015, and Chinese shipments are up 14 percent over the same period. While it is a common practice for buyers to mix U.S. and foreign-produced oils to create a final product with a certain flavor profile, the greatest percentage of oil in those blends continues to be from the Far West. The Committee and the industry expect that practice to continue into the future.

One exception to the rising trend in spearmint oil imports, India has reduced shipments over the last two years. Recent reports used by the Committee indicate that spearmint oil produced in India is improving in quality, yet decreasing in acreage. Indian spearmint oil is increasingly regarded as an alternative to high quality, Far West Native spearmint oil, but production problems have limited its importation into the U.S. market. As a result, imports from India, while still in demand, decreased in the past year. However, spearmint oil from India may return as a major threat to the Far West Native spearmint oil industry's domestic market share in the future.

One of the factors considered by the Committee when it estimated trade demand was that sales of mint products, both domestically and abroad, have slowed down. This is largely the result of slowing economies in Europe and Asia. In addition, demand is expected to be impacted by the purchasing patterns of end users. Over the last several years, end users may have been building reserve stocks of Far West oil when prices were low as a hedge against future price increases. End users of spearmint oil are expected to continue to rely on Far West production as their main source of high quality Native spearmint oil, but demand may be at lower quantities moving forward in response to the current market factors. However, Committee members remain optimistic that demand will rise again in the long term.

As such, spearmint oil handlers, who regularly help predict trade demand for Far West Native spearmint oil, estimate demand to range between 1,300,000 and 1,400,000 pounds (with an average of 1,320,000 pounds) for the 2017-2018 marketing year. This estimate is the same as the estimate for the previous year. The Committee used the handlers' input when it estimated 2017-2018 marketing year Native spearmint oil trade demand to be 1,250,000 pounds. This figure is 25,000 pounds less than the figure used in the previous marketing year and approximately 75,000 pounds below the 3-year average sales figure (1,324,560 pounds).

The estimated carry-in of 189,820 pounds of Native spearmint oil on June 1, 2017, in conjunction with the Committee recommended salable quantity of 1,075,051 pounds, would result in an estimated total available supply of 1,264,871 pounds of Native spearmint oil during the 2017-2018 marketing year. With estimated trade demand of 1,250,000 pounds for the 2017-2018 marketing year, the Committee projects that 14,871 pounds of Native spearmint oil will be carried into the 2018-2019 marketing year, a reduction of 174,909 pounds from the estimated 2017-2018 marketing year carry-in. The Committee estimates that there will be 1,094,659 pounds of Native spearmint oil held in the reserve pool at the beginning of the 2017-2018 marketing year. Should the industry experience an unexpected increase in trade demand during the 2017-2018 marketing year, Native spearmint oil in the reserve pool could be released to satisfy that demand.

The Committee's stated intent in the use of marketing order volume regulation provisions for Native spearmint oil is to keep adequate supplies available to meet market needs while maintaining orderly marketing conditions. With that in mind, the Committee developed its recommendation for the proposed Native spearmint oil salable quantity and allotment percentage for the 2017-2018 marketing year based on the information discussed above, as well as the data outlined below.

(A) Estimated carry-in of Native spearmint oil on June 1, 2017: 189,820 pounds. This figure is the difference between the revised 2016-2017 marketing year total available supply of 1,430,820 pounds and the revised 2016-2017 marketing year estimated trade demand of 1,241,000 pounds.

(B) Estimated trade demand of Native spearmint oil for the 2017-2018 marketing year: 1,250,000 pounds. This estimate was established by the Committee and is based on input from producers at six Native spearmint oil production area meetings held in mid-October 2016, as well as estimates provided by handlers and other meeting participants at the October 19, 2016, main meeting. This figure represents a decrease of 25,000 pounds from the previous year's estimate. The average estimated trade demand for Native spearmint oil from the six production area grower's meetings was 1,287,500 pounds, whereas the handlers' estimates ranged from 1,300,000 to 1,400,000 pounds. The average of Far West Native spearmint oil sales over the last three years is 1,324,560 pounds. However, the quantity marketed over the most recent full marketing year, 2015-2016, was 1,241,140 pounds. The Committee chose to be conservative in the establishment of its trade demand estimate for the 2017-2018 marketing year to avoid oversupplying the market in the face of increasing production.

(C) Salable quantity of Native spearmint oil required from the 2017-2018 marketing year production: 1,060,180 pounds. This figure is the difference between the estimated 2017-2018 marketing year estimated trade demand (1,250,000 pounds) and the estimated carry-in on June 1, 2017 (189,820 pounds). This is the minimum amount of Native spearmint oil that the Committee believes would be required to meet the anticipated 2017-2018 marketing year trade demand.

(D) Total estimated allotment base of Native spearmint oil for the 2017-2018 marketing year: 2,443,297 pounds. This figure represents a one-percent increase over the 2016-2017 total allotment base of 2,419,106 pounds as prescribed by the order in § 985.53(d)(1). The one-percent increase equals 24,191 pounds of Native spearmint oil. This estimate is generally revised each year on June 1 due to producer base being lost because of the bona fide effort production provisions of § 985.53(e). The revision is usually minimal.

(F) Recommended Native spearmint oil allotment percentage for the 2017-2018 marketing year: 44 percent. This is the Committee's recommendation based on the computed allotment percentage (43.4 percent), the average of the computed allotment percentage figures from the six production area meetings (46.7 percent), and input from producers and handlers at the October 19, 2016, meeting. The recommended 44 percent allotment percentage is also based on the Committee's belief that the computed percentage (43.4 percent) may not adequately supply the potential market for Native spearmint oil in the 2017-2018 marketing year.

(H) Estimated available supply of Native spearmint oil for the 2017-2018 marketing year: 1,264,871 pounds. This figure is the sum of the 2017-2018 recommended salable quantity (1,075,051 pounds) and the estimated carry-in on June 1, 2017 (189,820 pounds).

Under volume regulation, the salable quantity is the total quantity of each class of spearmint oil that handlers may purchase from, or handle on behalf of, producers during a marketing year. Each producer is allotted a share of the salable quantity by applying the allotment percentage to the producer's allotment base for the applicable class of spearmint oil.

The Committee's recommended Scotch and Native spearmint oil salable quantities and allotment percentages of 774,645 pounds and 36 percent, and 1,075,051 pounds and 44 percent, respectively, are based on the goal of maintaining market stability. The Committee anticipates that this goal would be achieved by matching the available supply of each class of spearmint oil to the estimated demand of each, thus avoiding extreme fluctuations in inventories and prices.

The salable quantities proposed in this rule are not expected to cause a shortage of spearmint oil supplies. Any unanticipated or additional market demand for spearmint oil which may develop during the marketing year could be satisfied by an intra-seasonal increase in the salable quantity. The order contains a provision in § 985.51 for intra-seasonal increases to allow the Committee the flexibility to respond quickly to changing market conditions.

Under volume regulation, producers who produce more than their annual allotments during the marketing year may transfer such excess spearmint oil to producers who have produced less than their annual allotment. In addition, on December 1 of each year, producers that have not transferred their excess spearmint oil to other producers must place their excess spearmint oil production into the reserve pool to be released in the future in accordance with market needs and under the Committee's direction.

This proposed action, if adopted, would be similar to regulations issued in prior seasons. The average initial allotment percentage for the five most recent marketing years for both Scotch and Native spearmint oil is 52.6 percent.

In conjunction with the issuance of this proposed rule, USDA has reviewed the Committee's marketing policy statement for the 2017-2018 marketing year. The Committee's marketing policy statement, a requirement whenever the Committee recommends volume regulation, fully meets the intent of §§ 985.50 and 985.51 of the order.

During its discussion of potential 2017-2018 salable quantities and allotment percentages, the Committee considered: (1) The estimated quantity of salable oil of each class held by producers and handlers; (2) the estimated demand for each class of oil; (3) the prospective production of each class of oil; (4) the total of allotment bases of each class of oil for the current marketing year and the estimated total of allotment bases of each class for the ensuing marketing year; (5) the quantity of reserve oil, by class, in storage; (6) producer prices of oil, including prices for each class of oil; and (7) general market conditions for each class of oil, including whether the estimated season average price to producers is likely to exceed parity. Conformity with USDA's “Guidelines for Fruit, Vegetable, and Specialty Crop Marketing Orders” has also been reviewed and confirmed.

The establishment of the proposed salable quantities and allotment percentages would allow for anticipated market needs. In determining anticipated market needs, the Committee considered historical sales, as well as changes and trends in production and demand. This rule would also provide producers with information on the amount of spearmint oil that should be produced for the 2017 season in order to meet anticipated market demand.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the economic impact of this action on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has prepared this initial regulatory flexibility analysis.

The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of businesses subject to such actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are unique in that they are brought about through group action of essentially small entities acting on their own behalf.

There are eight spearmint oil handlers subject to regulation under the order, approximately 41 producers of Scotch spearmint oil, and approximately 94 producers of Native spearmint oil in the regulated production area. Small agricultural service firms are defined by the Small Business Administration (SBA) as those having annual receipts of less than $7,500,000, and small agricultural producers are defined as those having annual receipts of less than $750,000 (13 CFR 121.201).

Based on the SBA's definition of small entities, the Committee estimates that two of the eight handlers regulated by the order could be considered small entities. Most of the handlers are large corporations involved in the international trading of essential oils and the products of essential oils. In addition, the Committee estimates that 12 of the 41 Scotch spearmint oil producers and 31 of the 94 Native spearmint oil producers could be classified as small entities under the SBA definition. Thus, a majority of handlers and producers of Far West spearmint oil may not be classified as small entities.

This proposed rule would establish the quantity of spearmint oil produced in the Far West, by class, which handlers may purchase from, or handle on behalf of, producers during the 2017-2018 marketing year. The Committee recommended this rule to help maintain stability in the spearmint oil market by matching supply to estimated demand, thereby avoiding extreme fluctuations in supplies and prices. Establishing quantities that may be purchased or handled during the marketing year through volume regulations allows producers to coordinate their spearmint oil production with the expected market demand. Authority for this action is provided in §§ 985.50, 985.51, and 985.52 of the order.

The Far West spearmint oil industry is characterized by producers whose farming operations generally involve more than one commodity and whose income from farming operations is not exclusively dependent on the production of spearmint oil. A typical spearmint oil producing operation has enough acreage for rotation such that the total acreage required to produce the crop is about one-third spearmint and two-thirds rotational crops. Thus, the typical spearmint oil producer has to have considerably more acreage than is planted to spearmint during any given season. Crop rotation is an essential cultural practice in the production of spearmint oil for purposes of weed, insect, and disease control. To remain economically viable with the added costs associated with spearmint oil production, a majority of spearmint oil producing farms fall into the SBA category of large businesses.

Small spearmint oil producers generally are not as extensively diversified as larger ones and, as such, are more at risk from market fluctuations. Such small producers generally need to market their entire annual production of spearmint oil and are not financially able to hold spearmint oil for sale in future years. In addition, small producers generally do not have a large assortment of other crops to cushion seasons with poor spearmint oil returns.

Conversely, large diversified producers have the potential to endure one or more seasons of poor spearmint oil markets because income from alternate crops could support their operation for a period of time. Reasonable assurance of a stable price and market provides all producing entities with the ability to maintain proper cash flow and to meet annual expenses.

Costs to producers and handlers, large and small, resulting from this rules are expected to be offset by the benefits derived from a more stable market and increased returns. The benefits of this rule are expected to be equally available to all producers and handlers regardless of their size.

Instability in the spearmint oil sub-sector of the mint industry is much more likely to originate on the supply side than the demand side. Fluctuations in yield and acreage planted from season to season tend to be larger than fluctuations in the amount purchased by handlers. Historically, demand for spearmint oil tends to change slowly from year to year.

Demand for spearmint oil at the farm level is derived from retail demand for spearmint-flavored products such as chewing gum, toothpaste, and mouthwash. The manufacturers of these products are by far the largest users of spearmint oil. However, spearmint flavoring is generally a very minor component of the products in which it is used, so changes in the raw product price have little impact on the retail prices for those goods.

In 2013, 2014, and 2015, the Committee set salable percentages at levels that resulted in most, if not all, of the spearmint oil production being made available to the market. This was in response to the increased demand for spearmint oil from the Far West due to increased utilization by end users and the reduced supply of spearmint oil coming from other production areas, both domestic and foreign.

Although there is still strong demand for spearmint oil, competing areas (mainly Canada) have experienced better than expected production in 2015 and 2016, and will create some marketing pressure for spearmint oil from the Far West. In addition, the slowing of international markets for spearmint-flavored products has negatively impacted the demand for domestically produced spearmint oil. Thus, the lower salable quantities and allotment percentages recommended by the Committee for the 2017-2018 marketing year are intended to be responsive to the changing environment of the spearmint oil market.

In the late 1990s, the Committee recommended higher than normal salable quantities and allotment percentages in hopes of gaining market share. This approach did not work, and in the following years, the salable quantities and allotment percentages were established at lower levels in order to reduce the excess spearmint oil production and resulting build-up of inventory. In order to avoid a similar scenario moving forward, the Committee, relying heavily on the information provided to them by spearmint oil handlers during the October 19, 2016, meeting, ultimately recommended reducing the 2017-2018 marketing year salable quantities and allotment percentages from the previous year to better align the available supply with market demand.

The Committee reported that recent producer prices for spearmint oil are $16.50 to $18.00 per pound. Average producer prices for all types of spearmint oil for 2013 through 2015 were $18.79, $19.21, and $18.32, respectively. These are computed price averages for Washington, Oregon, and Idaho combined, based on NASS data.

Spearmint oil production tends to be cyclical. Prior to the inception of the marketing order in 1980, extreme variability in producer prices was common. For example, the season average producer price for Washington Native spearmint oil in 1971 was $3.00 per pound. By 1975, the producer price had risen to $11.00 per pound, an increase of over 260% in just four years. Such fluctuations were not unusual in the spearmint oil industry in the years leading up to the promulgation of the order. For most producers, this was an untenable situation. Years of relatively high spearmint oil production, with demand remaining relatively stable, led to periods in which large producer stocks of unsold spearmint oil depressed producer prices. Shortages and high prices followed in subsequent years, as producers responded to price signals by cutting back production.

After establishment of the order, the supply and price variability in the spearmint oil market moderated. During the 25-year period from 1982 to 2006, the season average producer price for Native spearmint oil ranged from a high of $11.10 to a low of $9.00 per pound, or a difference of 23 percent. No change in producer price from one year to the next during this period was more than $1.00 per pound. This is a remarkable record of price stability. From 2006 to 2008, when production contracts tied to input costs were prevalent in the industry, the annual average Native producer price jumped by $3.80 per pound. During this time period, prices for fuel, fertilizer, and labor increased dramatically, resulting in higher contracted producer prices and a concurrent increase in the overall season average producer price for the industry.

The significant variability of the spearmint oil market is illustrated by the fact that the coefficient of variation, or CV (a standard measure of variability), of Far West spearmint oil producer prices for the period 1980-2015 (when the marketing order was in effect) is 24 percent, compared to 36 percent for the decade prior to the promulgation of the order (1970-79) and 49 percent for the prior 20-year period (1960-79). The coefficient of variation, as presented herein, was calculated by USDA from information provided by the Committee and NASS. This analysis provides an indication of the price stabilizing impact of the marketing order as higher CV values correspond to greater variability.

Based on NASS data, production in the shortest marketing year since the establishment of the order was about 47 percent of the 36-year average (1.96 million pounds from 1980 through 2015). The largest crop was approximately 157 percent of the 36-year average. A key consequence is that, in years of oversupply and low prices, the season average producer price of spearmint oil is below the average cost of production (as measured by the Washington State University Cooperative Extension Service).

The wide fluctuations in supply and prices that result from the cyclical nature of the spearmint oil industry, which were even more pronounced before the creation of the order, can create liquidity problems for some producers. The order was designed to reduce the price impacts of the cyclical swings in production. However, producers have been less able to weather these cycles in recent years because of increases to production costs. While prices for spearmint oil have been relatively steady, the cost of production has increased to the extent that plans to plant spearmint may be postponed or vacated indefinitely. Producers may also be enticed by the prices of alternative crops and their lower cost of production.

In an effort to stabilize prices, the spearmint oil industry uses the volume regulation mechanisms authorized under the order. This authority allows the Committee to recommend a salable quantity and allotment percentage for each class of oil for the upcoming marketing year. The salable quantity for each class of oil is the total volume of spearmint oil produced in a marketing year that producers may sell during that same marketing year. The allotment percentage for each class of spearmint oil is derived by dividing the salable quantity by the total allotment base.

Each producer is then issued an annual allotment certificate, in pounds, for the applicable class of oil. This is calculated by multiplying the producer's allotment base by the applicable allotment percentage. This is the amount of oil of each applicable class that the producer can market under the order.

By December 1 of each year, the Committee identifies any oil that individual producers have produced above the volume specified on annual allotment certificates. Prior to December 1, such excess oil can be transferred to another producer to fill a deficiency in that producer's annual allotment as provided for in § 985.156(a).

The order allows limited quantities of excess oil to be sold by one producer to another producer to fill production deficiencies during a marketing year. A deficiency occurs when on-farm production is less than a producer's annual allotment. When a producer has a deficiency, the producer may utilize their own reserve pool oil to fill that deficiency, or excess production (production of spearmint oil in excess of the producer's annual allotment) from another producer may also be secured to fill the deficiency. As mentioned previously, all of these provisions need to be exercised prior to December 1 of each year.

Excess spearmint oil not transferred to another producer to fill a deficiency is held in storage and, on December 1, is added to the reserve pool administered by the Committee pursuant to § 985.157. The Committee maintains the reserve pool for each class of spearmint oil. Once spearmint oil is placed in the reserve pool, such spearmint oil cannot enter the market during that marketing year unless USDA approves a Committee recommendation to increase the salable quantity and allotment percentage for a certain class of oil, subsequently making a portion of the reserve pool of that class of spearmint oil available to the market. Without an increase in the salable quantity and allotment percentage, spearmint oil placed in the reserve pool cannot be removed from the reserve pool and marketed in the marketing year in which it is initially placed in the reserve pool. However, producers may dispose of reserve spearmint oil from their own production, and held in their own account, under certain provisions in subsequent marketing years under the supervision of the Committee.

While the Committee administers the reserve pool of spearmint oil, ownership and physical possession of spearmint oil held in reserve does not transfer to the Committee. The Committee accounts for, and controls the release of, reserve spearmint oil but does not take title to, or dispose of, any such oil of its own accord or for its own benefit. Producers, at their sole discretion, make the decisions regarding the disposition of oil held in the reserve pool under any one of three possible mechanisms.

Section 985.57(b) details the conditions under which a producer may dispose of their reserve pool spearmint oil. First, producers may utilize reserve oil from their own production to fill intra-seasonal increases in the allotment percentage and salable quantity. Second, producers may fill an ensuing year's annual allotment from spearmint oil held in the reserve pool. Lastly, producers may exchange salable oil of the same class and quantity of reserve oil from their own production to rotate stock, so long as the Committee is properly notified and the oil is properly identified.

In any given year, the total available supply of spearmint oil is composed of current production plus salable carryover stocks from the previous crop. The Committee seeks to maintain market stability by balancing supply and demand, and to close the marketing year with an appropriate level of salable spearmint oil to carry over into the subsequent marketing year. If the industry has production in excess of the salable quantity, the reserve pool absorbs the surplus quantity of spearmint oil, thereby withholding it from the market, unless such oil is needed to fill unanticipated intra-seasonal increases in demand. In this way, excess spearmint oil is not allowed to oversupply the market and create price instability. Likewise, if production is insufficient in any given year to fully supply the market with spearmint oil, the reserve pool oil can be released to satisfy the market demand until production can be increased.

Therefore, under its provisions, the order may attempt to stabilize prices by (1) regulating supply and establishing reserves in high production years, thus minimizing the price-depressing effect that excess producer stocks have on unsold spearmint oil and (2) ensuring that stocks are available in short supply years when prices would otherwise increase dramatically. Reserve pool stocks, which increase in high production years, are drawn down in years where the crop is short.

An econometric model generated by USDA was used to assess the impact that volume regulation has on the prices producers receive for their commodity. Without volume regulation, spearmint oil markets would likely be over-supplied. This could result in low producer prices and a large volume of oil stored and carried over to the next crop year. The model estimates how much lower producer prices would likely be in the absence of volume regulation.

The Committee estimated trade demand for the 2017-2018 marketing year for both classes of oil at 2,175,000 pounds, and that the expected combined salable carry-in will be 364,327 pounds. This results in a combined required salable quantity of 1,810,673 pounds (2,175,000 pounds of total trade demand less 364,327 pounds of total carry-in) for the 2017-2018 marketing year. Under volume regulation, total sales of spearmint oil by producers for the 2017-2018 marketing year would be held to 2,214,023 pounds (the recommended salable quantity for both classes of spearmint oil of 1,849,696 pounds plus 364,327 pounds of carry-in). This total available supply of 2,214,023 pounds should be more than adequate to supply the 2,175,000 pounds of anticipated total trade demand for spearmint oil. In addition, as of June 1, 2016, the total reserve pool for both classes of spearmint oil stood at 611,331 pounds. Furthermore, that quantity is expected to rise over the course of the 2016-2017 marketing year. Should trade demand increase unexpectedly during the 2017-2018 marketing year, reserve pool spearmint oil could be released into the market to supply that increase in demand.

The recommended allotment percentages, upon which 2017-2018 producer allotments are based, are 36 percent for Scotch spearmint oil and 44 percent for Native spearmint oil. Without volume regulation, producers would not be held to these allotment levels, and could produce and sell an unrestricted quantity of spearmint oil. The USDA econometric model estimated that the season average producer price per pound (from both classes of spearmint oil) would decline about $2.45 per pound as a result of the higher quantities of spearmint oil that would be produced and marketed without volume regulation. The surplus situation for the spearmint oil market that would exist without volume regulation in 2017-2018 also would likely dampen prospects for improved producer prices in future years because of the buildup in stocks.

The use of volume regulation allows the industry to fully supply spearmint oil markets while avoiding the negative consequences of over-supplying these markets. The use of volume regulation is believed to have little or no effect on consumer prices of products containing spearmint oil and would not result in fewer retail sales of such products.

The Committee discussed alternatives to the recommendations contained in this rule for both classes of spearmint oil. The Committee discussed and rejected the idea of not regulating any volume for both classes of spearmint oil because of the severe price-depressing effects that would likely occur without volume regulation. The alternative to establish salable quantities and allotment percentages at the 2016-2017 marketing year's levels was discussed, but not put to any motion, for both classes of oil. The Committee also discussed and considered salable quantities and allotment percentages that were above and below the levels that were ultimately recommended for Scotch spearmint oil. Ultimately, the action taken by the Committee was to decrease the salable quantities and allotment percentages for both Class 1 and Class 3 spearmint oil from the current 2016-2017 marketing year levels.

As noted earlier, the Committee's recommendation to establish salable quantities and allotment percentages for both classes of spearmint oil was made after careful consideration of all available information including: (1) The estimated quantity of salable oil of each class held by producers and handlers; (2) the estimated demand for each class of oil; (3) the prospective production of each class of oil; (4) the total of allotment bases of each class of oil for the current marketing year and the estimated total of allotment bases of each class for the ensuing marketing year; (5) the quantity of reserve oil, by class, in storage; (6) producer prices of oil, including prices for each class of oil; and (7) general market conditions for each class of oil, including whether the estimated season average price to producers is likely to exceed parity.

Based on its review, the Committee believes that the salable quantities and allotment percentages recommended would achieve the objectives sought. The Committee also believes that, should there be no volume regulation in effect for the upcoming marketing year, the Far West spearmint oil industry would return to the pronounced cyclical price patterns that occurred prior to the promulgation of the order. As previously stated, annual salable quantities and allotment percentages have been issued for both classes of spearmint oil since the order's inception. The salable quantities and allotment percentages proposed herein are expected to facilitate the goal of maintaining orderly marketing conditions for Far West spearmint oil for the 2017-2018 and future marketing years.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the order's information collection requirements have been previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB No. 0581-0178, Specialty Crops Program. No changes are necessary in those requirements as a result of this action. Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval.

This proposed rule would establish the salable quantities and allotment percentages for Class 1 (Scotch) spearmint oil and Class 3 (Native) spearmint oil produced in the Far West during the 2017-2018 marketing year. Accordingly, this action would not impose any additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large spearmint oil producers or handlers. As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies.

AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to promote the use of the internet and other information technologies to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information and services, and for other purposes.

USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this proposed rule.

In addition, the Committee's meeting was widely publicized throughout the spearmint oil industry and all interested persons were invited to attend the meeting and participate in Committee deliberations on all issues. Like all Committee meetings, the October 19, 2016, meeting was a public meeting and all entities, both large and small, were able to express views on this issue. Finally, interested persons are invited to submit comments on this proposed rule, including the regulatory and informational impacts of this action on small businesses.

A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/moa/small-businesses. Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent to Richard Lower at the previously mentioned address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

A 30-day comment period is provided to allow interested persons to respond to this proposal. Thirty days is deemed appropriate because handlers are aware of this action, which was recommended by the committee at a public meeting. In addition, this proposed rule would need to be in place as soon as possible since producers will begin planting spearmint root stock as early as February, 2017 and need adequate time to decide which class and how much spearmint to grow. All written comments timely received will be considered before a final determination is made on this matter.

Proposed rule; public comment period and opportunity for public hearing on proposed amendment.

SUMMARY:

We, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE), are announcing receipt of a proposed amendment to the North Dakota regulatory program (North Dakota program) under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). North Dakota proposes numerous rule changes to the North Dakota Administrative Code for surface coal mining and reclamation operations and reclamation law changes that were made during North Dakota's 2015 Legislative Session. The law changes added a definition of “commercial leonardite” and excluded oxidized lignite (leonardite) from the statutory definition of “coal.” The law changes also added the phrase “or commercial leonardite” to many other sections of the reclamation law. North Dakota intends to revise its program to improve operational efficiency.

This document gives the times and locations that the North Dakota program and proposed amendment to that program are available for your inspection, the comment period during which you may submit written comments on the amendment, and the procedures that we will follow for the public hearing, if one is requested.

DATES:

We will accept written comments on this amendment until 4:00 p.m., m.d.t. May 1, 2017. If requested, we will hold a public hearing on the amendment on April 25, 2017. We will accept requests to speak until 4:00 p.m., m.d.t. on April 17, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments, identified by SATS No. ND-054-FOR, by any of the following methods:

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this rulemaking. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the “Public Comment Procedures” heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

Docket: For access to the docket to review copies of the North Dakota program, this amendment, a listing of any scheduled public hearings, and all written comments received in response to this document, you must go to the address listed below during normal business hours, Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. You may receive one free copy of the amendment by contacting OSMRE's Casper Area Office or the full text of the program amendment is available for you to read at www.regulations.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:I. Background on the North Dakota ProgramII. Description of the Proposed AmendmentIII. Public Comment ProceduresIV. Procedural DeterminationsI. Background on the North Dakota Program

Section 503(a) of the Act permits a State to assume primacy for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations on non-Federal and non-Indian lands within its borders by demonstrating that its State program includes, among other things, State laws and regulations that govern surface coal mining and reclamation operations in accordance with the Act and consistent with the Federal regulations. See 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these criteria, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally approved the North Dakota program on December 15, 1980. You can find background information on the North Dakota program, including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of comments, and conditions of approval of the North Dakota program in the December 15, 1980 Federal Register (45 FR 82214). You can also find later actions concerning North Dakota's program and program amendments at 30 CFR 934.15 and 934.30.

II. Description of the Proposed Amendment

By letter dated May 19, 2016 (Administrative Record No. ND-PP-01), North Dakota sent us an amendment to its program under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). North Dakota sent the amendment at its own initiative to include changes made to both the North Dakota Century Code (NDCC) and the North Dakota Administrative Code (NDAC). The full text of the program amendment is available for you to read at the locations listed above under ADDRESSES.

Specifically, North Dakota proposes numerous rule changes to the NDAC Article 69-5.2 for surface coal mining and reclamation operations and reclamation law changes that were made by Senate Bill No. 2377 during North Dakota's 2015 Legislative Session. The law changes added a definition of “commercial leonardite” and excluded oxidized lignite (leonardite) from the statutory definition of “coal” in NDCC Chapter 38-14.1, while ensuring the mining of leonardite remains subject to the same permitting and reclamation requirements as coal. The law changes also added the phrase “or commercial leonardite” to many other sections of the reclamation law as appropriate. Similarly, the proposed rule changes primarily consist of adding the phrase “or commercial leonardite” immediately after the word “coal” when it is not part of a definition or other phrase that doesn't otherwise include “commercial leonardite.”

III. Public Comment Procedures

Under the provisions of 30 CFR 732.17(h), we are seeking your comments on whether the amendment satisfies the applicable program approval criteria of 30 CFR 732.15. If we approve the amendment, it will become part of the North Dakota program.

Electronic or Written Comments

If you submit written or electronic comments on the proposed rule during the 30-day comment period, they should be specific, confined to issues pertinent to the proposed regulations, and explain the reason for any recommended change(s). We appreciate any and all comments, but those most useful and likely to influence decisions on the final regulations will be those that either involve personal experience or include citations to and analyses of SMCRA, its legislative history, its implementing regulations, case law, other pertinent State or Federal laws or regulations, technical literature, or other relevant publications.

We cannot ensure that comments received after the close of the comment period (see DATES) or sent to an address other than those listed above (see ADDRESSES) will be included in the docket for this rulemaking and considered.

Public Availability of Comments

Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

Public Hearing

If you wish to speak at the public hearing, contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by 4:00 p.m., m.d.t. on April 17, 2017. If you are disabled and need reasonable accommodations to attend a public hearing, contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will arrange the location and time of the hearing with those persons requesting the hearing. If no one requests an opportunity to speak, we will not hold the hearing.

To assist the transcriber and ensure an accurate record, we request, if possible, that each person who speaks at the public hearing provide us with a written copy of his or her comments. The public hearing will continue on the specified date until everyone scheduled to speak has been given an opportunity to be heard. If you are in the audience and have not been scheduled to speak and wish to do so, you will be allowed to speak after those who have been scheduled. We will end the hearing after everyone scheduled to speak and others present in the audience who wish to speak, have been heard.

Public Meeting

If only one person requests an opportunity to speak, we may hold a public meeting rather than a public hearing. If you wish to meet with us to discuss the amendment, please request a meeting by contacting the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All such meetings are open to the public and, if possible, we will post notices of meetings at the locations listed under ADDRESSES. We will make a written summary of each meeting a part of the administrative record.

This rulemaking is exempted from review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866.

Other Laws and Executive Orders Affecting Rulemaking

When a State submits a program amendment to OSMRE for review, our regulations at 30 CFR 732.17(h) require us to publish a notice in the Federal Register indicating receipt of the proposed amendment, its text or a summary of its terms, and an opportunity for public comment. We conclude our review of the proposed amendment after the close of the public comment period and determine whether the amendment should be approved, approved in part, or not approved. At that time, we will also make the determinations and certifications required by the various laws and executive orders governing the rulemaking process and include them in the final rule.

Proposed rule; public comment period and opportunity for public hearing on proposed amendment.

SUMMARY:

We, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE), are announcing receipt of a proposed amendment to the Virginia regulatory program (the Virginia program) under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). Through this proposed amendment, Virginia seeks to revise its program regulations to require Virginia to enter permit information into the Applicant Violator System (AVS) database upon receipt of a complete permit application and require Virginia to conduct a final compliance review between the application approval and permit issuance.

This document gives the times and locations that the Virginia program and this proposed amendment to that program are available for your inspection, the comment period during which you may submit written comments on the amendment, and the procedures that we will follow for the public hearing; if one is requested.

DATES:

We will accept written comments on this amendment until 4:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time (e.s.t.), May 1, 2017. If requested, we will hold a public hearing on the amendment on April 25, 2017. We will accept requests to speak at a hearing until 4:00 p.m., e.s.t. on April 17, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments, identified by SATS No. VA-128-FOR, by any of the following methods:

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this rulemaking. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the “Public Comment Procedures” heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

Docket: For access to the docket to review copies of the Virginia program, this amendment, a listing of any scheduled public hearings, and all written comments received in response to this document, you must go to the address listed below during normal business hours, Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. You may receive one free copy of the amendment by contacting OSMRE's Knoxville Field Office or the full text of the program amendment is available for you to read at www.regulations.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:I. Background on the Virginia ProgramII. Description of the Proposed AmendmentIII. Public Comment ProceduresIV. Procedural DeterminationsI. Background on the Virginia Program

Section 503(a) of the Act permits a State to assume primacy for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations on non-Federal and non-Indian lands within its borders by demonstrating that its program includes, among other things, State laws and regulations that govern surface coal mining and reclamation operations in accordance with the Act and consistent with the Federal regulations. See 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these criteria, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally approved the Virginia program on December 15, 1981. You can find background information on the Virginia program, including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of comments, and conditions of approval of the Virginia program in the December 15, 1981, Federal Register (46 FR 61088). You can also find later actions concerning the Virginia program and program amendments at 30 CFR 946.12, 946.13, and 946.15.

II. Description of the Proposed Amendment

By letter dated April 29, 2016 (Administrative Record No. VA 2024), Virginia sent us an amendment to its program under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.).

In 2015, OSMRE conducted an annual review of the Virginia regulatory program. OSMRE determined that Virginia's regulations required two additional components regarding the AVS in order to conform with Federal regulations at 30 CFR 773.8 and 773.12. The AVS is an automated information system owned and operated by OSMRE. Information on applicants, permittees, operators, applications and permits as well as unabated or uncorrected environmental violations of SMCRA is maintained in this nationwide database for OSMRE's Federal and State programs. The primary purpose of the AVS is to assist OSMRE and States in making permit eligibility determination required under section 510(c) of SMCRA for applicants of surface coal mining permits. Section 510(c) of SMCRA prohibits issuance of a new permit to any applicant who owns or controls mining operations having unabated or uncorrected violations anywhere in the United States until those violations are abated or corrected or are in the process of being abated or corrected to the satisfaction of the agency with jurisdiction over the violation. The data contained in AVS also assists OSMRE and States in determining the eligibility of bidders on Abandoned Mine Land program contracts under Title IV of SMCRA. Section 773.8 involves general provisions for review of permit application information and entry into the AVS and section 773.12 involves permit eligibility determinations.

Accordingly, Virginia now seeks to amend its State program and is proposing changes to its State regulations as summarized below.

A. Virginia proposes to amend its State program to add provisions to its Virginia Administrative Code (VAC) at 4 VAC 25-130-773.15(a)(3), Review of Permit Applications, to require Virginia to enter permit information into the Federal AVS system after receiving and reviewing a complete permit application. Virginia asserts that this change is consistent with the Federal requirements of 30 CFR 773.8.

B. Virginia proposes to add a provision to its State program to specify that the final compliance review conducted prior to permit issuance shall occur no more than five business days before issuance. The regulations at 4 VAC 25-130-773.15(e), Review of Permit Applications, requires Virginia to consider any new information concerning violations and business structures submitted during the permit review process. The proposed amendment would add language to that section of the code specifying the maximum period of five business days between that review and permit issuance. Virginia asserts that this change is consistent with the Federal requirements at 773.12(c).

The full text of the program amendment is available for you to read at the locations listed above under ADDRESSES or at www.regulations.gov.

III. Public Comment Procedures

Under the provisions of 30 CFR 732.17(h), we are seeking your comments on whether the amendment satisfies the applicable program approval criteria of 30 CFR 732.15. If we approve the amendment, it will become part of the State program.

Electric or Written Comments

If you submit written or electronic comments on the proposed rule during the 30-day comment period, they should be specific, confined to issues pertinent to the proposed regulations, and explain the reason for any recommended change(s). We appreciate any and all comments, but those most useful and likely to influence decisions on the final regulations will be those that either involve personal experience or include citations to and analyses of SMCRA, its legislative history, its implementing regulations, case law, other pertinent State or Federal laws or regulations, technical literature, or other relevant publications.

We cannot ensure that comments received after the close of the comment period (see DATES) or sent to an address other than those listed (see ADDRESSES) will be included in the docket for this rulemaking and considered.

Public Availability of Comments

Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

Public Hearing

If you wish to speak at the public hearing, contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by 4:00 p.m., e.s.t. on April 17, 2017. If you are disabled and need reasonable accommodations to attend a public hearing, contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will arrange the location and time of the hearing with those persons requesting the hearing. If no one requests an opportunity to speak, we will not hold a hearing.

To assist the transcriber and ensure an accurate record, we request, if possible, that each person who speaks at the public hearing provide us with a written copy of his or her comments. The public hearing will continue on the specified date until everyone scheduled to speak has been given an opportunity to be heard. If you are in the audience and have not been scheduled to speak and wish to do so, you will be allowed to speak after those who have been scheduled. We will end the hearing after everyone scheduled to speak, and others present in the audience who wish to speak, have been heard.

Public Meeting

If only one person requests an opportunity to speak, we may hold a public meeting rather than a public hearing. If you wish to meet with us to discuss the amendment, please request a meeting by contacting the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All such meetings are open to the public and, if possible, we will post notices of meetings at the locations listed under ADDRESSES. We will make a written summary of each meeting a part of the administrative record.

This rule is exempted from review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866.

Other Laws and Executive Orders Affecting Rulemaking

When a State submits a program amendment to OSMRE for review, our regulations at 30 CFR 732.17(h) require us to publish a notice in the Federal Register indicating receipt of the proposed amendment, its text or a summary of its terms, and an opportunity for public comment. We conclude our review of the proposed amendment after the close of the public comment period and determine whether the amendment should be approved, approved in part, or not approved. At that time, we will also make the determinations and certifications required by the various laws and executive orders governing the rulemaking process and include them in the final rule.

The Coast Guard proposes to amend its safety zones regulations for annual events in the Captain of the Port Duluth Zone. This final rule would update the locations for seven safety zones, add two new safety zones, increase the safety zone radius of six existing fireworks events, and modify the format of the regulation to list the annual events and corresponding safety zones in table form. These proposed amendments will protect spectators, participants, and vessels from the hazards associated with annual marine events and improve the clarity and readability of the regulation.

DATES:

Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before May 1, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2017-0171 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number (USCG-2017-0171) in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this rule, call or email Lieutenant Junior Grade, John Mack, Chief of Waterways Management, Marine Safety Unit Duluth, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 218-725-3818, email John.V.Mack@uscg.mil.

On May 31, 2013 the Coast Guard published an NPRM in the Federal Register (78 FR 32608) entitled “Recurring Events in the Captain of the Port Duluth Zone.” The NPRM proposed to establish 8 permanent safety zones for annually recurring events in the Captain of the Port Duluth Zone under § 165.943. The NPRM was open for comment for 30 days.

On August 12, 2013 the Coast Guard published the Final Rule in the Federal Register (78 FR 48802) after receiving no comments on the NPRM. Through this proposed rule, the Coast Guard seeks to update § 165.943.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The Captain of the Port Duluth (COTP) has determined that an amendment to the recurring events list as published in 33 CFR 165.943 will be necessary to: Update the location of seven existing safety zones (Bridgefest Regatta Fireworks Display, Cornucopia 4th of July Fireworks Display, Duluth 4th Fest Fireworks Display, LaPointe 4th of July Fireworks Display, Point to LaPointe Swim, Lake Superior Dragon Boat Festival, Superior Man Triathlon), add two new safety zones (City of Bayfield 4th of July Fireworks Display & Two Harbors 4th of July Fireworks Display), increase the safety zone radius of six fireworks events (Bridgefest Regatta Fireworks Display, Ashland 4th of July Fireworks Display, Cornucopia 4th of July Fireworks Display, LaPointe 4th of July Fireworks Display, Lake Superior Dragon Boat Festival), and format the existing regulations into a table format. The purpose of this rule is to ensure safety of vessels and the navigable waters in the safety zone before, during, and after the scheduled event and to improve the overall clarity and readability of the rule.

The amendments to this proposed rule are necessary to ensure the safety of vessels and people during annual events taking place on or near federally maintained waterways in the Captain of the Port Duluth Zone. Although this proposed rule will be in effect year-round, the specific safety zones listed in Table 165.943 will only be enforced during a specified period of time when the event is on-going.

When a Notice of Enforcement for a particular safety zone is published, entry into, transiting through, or anchoring within the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Duluth, or his or her designated representative. The Captain of the Port Duluth or his or her designated representative can be contacted via VHF Channel 16. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Executive Order 13771 (“Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs”), directs agencies to reduce regulation and control regulatory costs and provides that “for every one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process.”

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this rule a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. As this rule is not a significant regulatory action, this rule is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771. See OMB's Memorandum titled “Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the Executive Order of January 30, 2017 titled `Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs' ” (February 2, 2017).

This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-day for each safety zone. Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit around all safety zones which will impact small designated areas within Lake Superior for short durations of time. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone and the rule allows vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard received no comments from the Small Business Administration on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.

Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.

Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves: The update of seven safety zone locations, the addition of two new safety zones, an increase of size for six safety zone radiuses for fireworks related events, and the reformatting of regulations into an easier to read table format. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

G. Protest Activities

The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.

We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions.

We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 FR 15086).

Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a final rule is published.

(a) Regulations. The following regulations apply to the safety zones listed in Table 165.943 of this section:

(1) The Coast Guard will provide advance notice of the enforcement date and time of the safety zone being enforced in Table 165.943, by issuing a Notice of Enforcement, as well as, a Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

(2) During the enforcement period, the general regulations found in § 165.23 shall apply.

(b) Contacting the Captain of the Port. While a safety zone listed in this section is enforced, the Captain of the Port Duluth or his or her on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of the Port Duluth, or his or her on-scene representative.

(c) Exemption. Public vessels, defined as any vessel owned or operated by the United States or by State or local governments, operating in an official capacity are exempted from the requirements of this section.

Table 165.943[Datum NAD 1983]EventLocationEvent date(1) Bridgefest Regatta Fireworks DisplayAll waters of the Keweenaw Waterway in Hancock, MI within the arc of a circle with a radius of no more than 1,120 feet from the launch site at position 47°07′22″ N., 088°35′28″ WMid June.(2) Ashland 4th of July Fireworks DisplayAll waters of Chequamegon Bay in Ashland, WI within the arc of a circle with a radius of no more than 1,120 feet from the launch site at position 46°35′50″ N., 090°52′59″ WOn or around July 4th.(3) City of Bayfield 4th of July Fireworks DisplayAll waters of the Lake Superior North Channel in Bayfield, WI within the arc of a circle with a radius of no more than 1,120 feet from the launch site at position 46°48′40″ N., 090°48′32″ WOn or around July 4th.(4) Cornucopia 4th of July Fireworks DisplayAll waters of Siskiwit Bay in Cornucopia, WI within the arc of a circle with a radius of no more than 1,120 feet from the launch site at position 46°51′35″ N., 091°06′15″ WOn or around July 4th.(5) Duluth 4th Fest Fireworks DisplayAll waters of the Duluth Harbor Basin, Northern Section in Duluth, MN within the arc of a circle with a radius of no more than 1,120 feet from the launch site at position 46°46′14″ N., 092°06′16″ WOn or around July 4th.(6) LaPointe 4th of July Fireworks DisplayAll waters of Lake Superior in LaPointe, WI within the arc of a circle with a radius of no more than 1,120 feet from the launch site at position 46°46′40″ N., 090°47′22″ WOn or around July 4th.(7) Two Harbors 4th of July Fireworks DisplayAll waters of Agate Bay in Two Harbors, MN within the arc of a circle with a radius of no more than 1,120 feet from the launch site at position 47°00′54″ N., 091°40′04″ WOn or around July 4th.(8) Point to LaPointe SwimAll waters of the Lake Superior North Channel between Bayfield and LaPointe, WI within an imaginary line created by the following coordinates: 46°48′50″ N., 090°48′44″ W., moving southeast to 46°46′44″ N., 090°47′33″ W., then moving northeast to 46°46′52″ N., 090°47′17″ W., then moving northwest to 46°49′03″ N., 090°48′25″ W., and finally returning to the starting positionEarly August.(9) Lake Superior Dragon Boat Festival Fireworks DisplayAll waters of Superior Bay in Superior, WI within the arc of a circle with a radius of no more than 1,120 feet from the launch site at position 46°43′28″ N., 092°03′47″ WLate August.(10) Superior Man TriathlonAll waters of the Duluth Harbor Basin, Northern Section in Duluth, MN within an imaginary line created by the following coordinates: 46°46′36″ N., 092°06′06″ W., moving southeast to 46°46′32″ N., 092°06′01″ W., then moving northeast to 46°46′45″ N., 092°05′45″ W., then moving northwest to 46°46′49″ N., 092°05′49″ W., and finally returning to the starting positionLate August.Dated: March 27, 2017.E.E. Williams,Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Duluth.[FR Doc. 2017-06352 Filed 3-30-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-PPOSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION39 CFR Part 3010[Docket No. RM2016-6; Order No. 3827]Motions Concerning Mail Preparation ChangesAGENCY:

Postal Regulatory Commission.

ACTION:

Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY:

The Commission is noticing the reinstatement of a proposed rulemaking. This notice informs the public of the docket's reinstatement, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

DATES:

Comments are due on or before May 1, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

On January 22, 2016, the Commission published a notice of proposed rulemaking (initial NPR) which proposed procedural rules for motions concerning mail preparation changes that require compliance with the price cap rules.1 The initial NPR was issued in conjunction with the Commission's order in Docket No. R2013-10R setting forth a standard to determine when mail preparation changes require compliance with § 3010.23(d)(2).2 In the initial NPR, the Commission explained that the Postal Service has the affirmative burden to determine whether a mail preparation change requires compliance with § 3010.23(d)(2) under the Commission's standard in Order No. 3047.3 The initial NPR proposed a procedural rule to permit interested parties to file a motion with the Commission where the Postal Service fails to recognize or account for a mail preparation change that has a rate effect under § 3010.23(d)(2).

1 The initial NPR was published in the Federal Register on February 1, 2016. See 81 FR 5085 (Feb. 1, 2016).

2 Order No. 3048, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Motions Concerning Mail Preparation Changes, January 22, 2016. The initial NPR was held in abeyance pending the Commission's resolution of the Postal Service's motion for reconsideration of Order No. 3047. See Order No. 3096, Order Holding Rulemaking in Abeyance, February 23, 2016. It was reinstated on July 27, 2016, and comments were received on September 2, 2016. See Notice Reinstating Rulemaking, July 27, 2016.

Specifically, the initial proposed rule § 3001.21(d) of this chapter required interested parties to file a motion with the Commission upon actual or constructive notice of a mail preparation change that had a rate effect requiring compliance with § 3010.23(d)(2). It also proposed a 30-day timeframe within which interested parties could file a motion concerning a mail preparation change, after which the Commission would either institute a proceeding or consider the motion within an ongoing matter.

In response to comments received on the initial NPR, the Commission is issuing this revised notice of proposed rulemaking (revised NPR) that: (1) Withdraws the proposed procedural rule under § 3001.21(d) of this chapter for motions concerning mail preparation changes; and (2) requires the Postal Service to publish all mail preparation changes in a publicly-available single source and affirmatively designate whether or not a mail preparation change requires compliance with § 3010.23(d)(2). The revised NPR specifies that, if raised by the Commission or challenged by a mailer, the Postal Service must demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that a change does not require compliance with § 3010.23(d)(2). The revised NPR narrows the scope of the initial proposed rule and provides an opportunity for public comment on this new proposed approach to ensure that the Postal Service properly accounts for the rate effects of mail preparation changes under § 3010.23(d)(2) in accordance with the Commission's standard articulated in Order No. 3047.

II. Comments on Initial NPR

The Commission received comments in response to the initial NPR, of which three were from the mailing industry, one was from the Public Representative, and one was from the Postal Service. Most commenters do not oppose the proposed rule, but raise questions about whether it impacts the Commission's authority and responsibility to independently review mail preparation changes for compliance with the price cap rules, or whether mailers could raise issues concerning mail preparation changes in other proceedings before the Commission. Commenters provide input generally on the following issues: (1) The timing provisions and effect on the Commission's independent authority; (2) the multiple sources used by the Postal Service to provide notice of mail preparation changes; (3) the Postal Service's affirmative statement of whether a mail preparation change has a rate impact; and (4) the standard of proof/evidentiary burden.

A. Comments on the Timing Provisions and Effect on the Commission's Independent Authority

A major area of concern raised by the commenters is the proposed rule's effect on the Commission's independent authority to review mail preparation changes for price cap compliance. Commenters raise questions about the rule's effect on the right to use existing procedures available in rate, annual compliance, and complaint proceedings to challenge the Postal Service's compliance with the price cap.

PostCom raises numerous issues with the proposed 30-day time limit and notice provisions set forth in the proposed rule.4 PostCom notes that, absent a waiver of the 30-day timeframe in certain circumstances, the 30-day requirement for filing motions conflicts with the Commission's price cap authority and responsibilities under 39 U.S.C. 3662 to hear complaints. PostCom Comments at 5-9. PostCom contends that, although it makes sense to provide mailers with a set procedure to raise issues with mail preparation changes, the Commission “should review the Postal Service's mail preparation changes and act independently if it determines that a change may result in prices in excess of the cap.” Id. at 8. PostCom submits that the 30-day window for filing motions potentially conflicts with the complaint procedures under 39 U.S.C. 3662(a) and contends that the Commission should not foreclose the ability of parties to utilize the complaint process which ensures “that violations of the price cap that are not immediately apparent can still be challenged.” Id. at 9.

4 Comments of the Association for Postal Commerce, September 2, 2016 (PostCom Comments).

Valpak states that the proposed rule will not fulfill the goal of ensuring that the Postal Service properly accounts for the rate effects of mail preparation changes under the Commission's price cap rules.5 Valpak views the 30-day timeframe and the potential foreclosure of “any other opportunity or method of raising such an issue in another forum or at a later time” as conflicting with the stated purpose of the rule. Valpak Comments at 2. Valpak notes that the structure of the proposed rule could be used by the Postal Service to argue that the “other avenues to request that the Commission require Postal Service compliance to the price cap rules, including filing comments in pricing dockets and annual compliance reviews, as well as filing a complaint” would be foreclosed if an interested party fails to file a motion under the proposed rule. Id. at 3. Valpak requests the Commission clarify that the proposed rule was not intended to be the exclusive remedy for issues regarding price cap compliance of mail preparation requirement changes. Id.

The National Postal Policy Council, the National Association of Presort Mailers, and the Association for Mail Electronic Enhancement (Joint Commenters) submit that the proposed rule should not be the exclusive means to raise the issue of price cap compliance for mail preparation requirements as a procedural rule “cannot substitute for the Commission's and Postal Service's legal responsibilities to ensure that rates for market-dominant products comply with the price cap restrictions established by the Congress.” 6 The Joint Commenters submit that the proposed rule “cannot shift to mailers the burden of proving that a mailing preparation change constitutes a classification change with cap implications merely by creating a procedural means of raising the issue.” Joint Comments at 12-13. Further, the Joint Commenters contend that a 30-day time period is insufficient to recognize the price cap implication of certain mail preparation changes and also prepare and file a motion within that timeframe. Id. at 7-8.

6 Comments of the National Postal Policy Council, the National Association of Presort Mailers, and the Association for Mail Electronic Enhancement, September 2, 2016, at 3 (Joint Comments).

The Public Representative questions the utility of a time limit on motions concerning mail preparation changes where such changes are made effective immediately or a short time after notice.7 Additionally, he questions whether a time limit on filing motions would mean that the Postal Service would be able to potentially violate the price cap if a motion was untimely. PR Comments at 10. His main concern is that the proposed rule leaves open a gap in price cap compliance review, where

a rate impact resulting from [mail preparation] changes would not necessarily be discovered if the Postal Service is required only to notify the Commission when it finds deletion or redefinition will occur and files for a rate change, or where an interested person recognizes a potential rate change and is willing to undertake the effort to file a motion with the Commission. Id. at 8. He concludes that the Commission “should not abdicate its responsibility to administer the price cap rules by not ensuring consideration of whether rate cells are effectively deleted or redefined by such changes, whether noticed in the DMM or elsewhere.” Id. at 7.

The Postal Service submits that the proposed rule should include a deadline for resolving motions, in addition to the 30-day timeframe for filing motions, as it seeks to know the “outcome of a mail-preparation motion before going forward with its pricing plans.” 8 It proposes that the Commission be required to resolve any motions concerning mail preparation changes within 60 calendar days of their filing. Postal Service Comments at 8.

8 United States Postal Service Comments on Proposed Rules for Motions Concerning Mail Preparation Changes, September 2, 2016, at 7-8 (Postal Service Comments).

B. Comments on the Multiple Sources Used by the Postal Service To Provide Notice of Mail Preparation Changes

In addition to issues with setting a 30-day timeframe for motions concerning mail preparation requirements, commenters submit that it is difficult to monitor the multiple sources used by the Postal Service to provide notice of mail preparation changes. Numerous commenters request that the Commission direct the Postal Service to identify a publication where all mail preparation changes will be published. Commenters submit that this requirement would allow mailers and the Commission to more easily monitor mail preparation changes for price cap compliance.

PostCom asserts that the multiple sources used by the Postal Service to publish mail preparation changes, changes between draft and final mail preparation changes, and informal communications about proposed changes make it difficult to determine what would trigger the 30-day timeframe for motions under the proposed rule. PostCom Comments at 2-4. As a result of these difficulties, PostCom proposes directing “the Postal Service to identify a publication in which all mail preparation changes will be published.” Id. at 5. The Joint Commenters also submit that the Postal Service's practice of publishing mail preparation changes in multiple, overlapping sources, “has made it harder for mailers to know the current (or future) rules and, by extension, even more difficult to know whether the real effects of mail preparation changes affect the price cap.” Joint Comments at 5. The Public Representative also supports requiring the Postal Service to file notice of mail preparation changes in a single source. PR Comments at 6-7. He submits that, because the changes are not published in a single source, “the Commission is not in a position to review the effects of each mail preparation change” and this creates a gap in regulatory coverage. Id.

C. Comments on the Postal Service's Affirmative Statement of Whether a Mail Preparation Change Has a Rate Impact

A third issue raised by commenters is the utility of the proposed rule's requirement that the Postal Service only designate where mail preparation changes have a rate impact. PostCom submits that the Postal Service should provide an affirmative statement of no price impact, providing clarity for mailers and no additional burden on the Postal Service in light of their affirmative duty to make the initial determination. PostCom Comments at 7. The Public Representative contends that the proposed rule does not include a mechanism to ensure that the Postal Service will comply with its burden to review mail preparation changes for rate impacts and submits that the Postal Service should be required to affirmatively state whether a mail preparation change has a rate impact for every change. PR Comments at 6-8. The Joint Commenters submit that the Postal Service should also provide information concerning the effect of the change on rate categories and cells, numbers of mailpieces affected by the change, an affirmative statement of whether or not the change has a rate effect, and statement of why the change “will or will not constitute a classification change under the standard adopted in Order No. 3047 as affirmed in Order No. 3441.” Joint Comments at 8-11.

D. Comments on the Standard of Proof/Evidentiary Burden

Commenters also submit questions regarding the evidentiary record and standard of proof that would be required for motions concerning mail preparation requirements and whether it would differ from existing procedures.

The Postal Service requests additional discovery procedures that would “allow for the development of an evidentiary record” under the proposed rule. Postal Service Comments at 4. First, it requests a requirement that mailers offer proof of costs and operational impact when filing a motion challenging the price cap impact of a mail preparation change. Id. at 5. Second, it submits that the proposed rule should include various discovery procedures to assist the Commission and the Postal Service “with evaluating whether the moving party has met its burden of demonstrating that the change imposes costs and burdens significant enough to require compliance with the price cap rules.” Id. at 6. In addition, the Postal Service suggests a meet and confer requirement prior to any motion practice over mail preparation changes under the proposed rule. Id. at 9.

PostCom submits that although the proposed rule “correctly declines to specify what information a party must provide in support of its motion, as the type of information available will differ in individual circumstances,” it fails to set forth the standard of review the Commission will apply to determine whether a motion warrants further procedures. PostCom Comments at 6. PostCom suggests that the Commission apply a “standard similar to that employed in a motion to dismiss and determine whether the mail preparation change would have a price impact if the consequences alleged by the movant were to occur.” Id.

III. Revised Proposed Rule

The revised proposed rule would require the Postal Service to affirmatively designate whether or not a mail preparation requirement change implicates the price cap in a single, publicly available source. Further, if challenged by a mailer or raised by the Commission, the Postal Service would have to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that a mail preparation change does not require compliance with § 3010.23(d)(2).

As numerous commenters raised questions regarding standard of proof for issues regarding compliance with § 3010.23(d)(2) for mail preparation changes, the Commission clarifies that it is the Postal Service's burden to demonstrate, by a preponderance of the evidence, that a specific mail preparation change does not implicate the price cap. This burden is consistent with the Postal Service's obligation to evaluate changes to mail preparation requirements for compliance with § 3010.23(d)(2) in accordance with the Commission's standard set forth in Order No. 3047. For the deletion prong of the Commission's standard, the inquiry is limited to whether the mail preparation change causes the elimination of a rate, or the functional equivalent of an elimination of a rate.9 For the redefinition prong, the Postal Service's showing does not require detailed analysis of mailer cost for a mail preparation change because the significance prong of the Commission's standard only requires a determination of whether the mail preparation change is large in magnitude. Order No. 3441 at 31.

As with the majority of proceedings before the Commission, the specific evidence presented will be largely fact dependent subject to the individual circumstances of the matter and the Postal Service's showing will be evaluated based on the evidence available at the time. Accordingly, in any proceeding where the price cap impact of a mail preparation change is being determined or challenged, the Postal Service must be able to show that the greater weight of the available evidence favors a finding that the change does not implicate § 3010.23(d)(2). In addition, as the Postal Service is in the best position to gather information on mailer costs and operational adjustments, in light of its abundant contact and consultation with the mailing industry, the Postal Service may submit such evidence and seek a determination from the Commission using the procedures set forth under § 3001.21 of this chapter prior to implementation of the change.

Under the revised rule, the Postal Service may designate a single source of its choosing, so long as the source is published and publicly available. The Postal Service shall file notice with the Commission after it designates the source it will use. Proposed § 3010.23(d)(5) also directs the Postal Service to affirmatively state in the single source publication whether or not the change requires compliance with § 3010.23(d)(2). This flows from the Postal Service's obligation to properly evaluate its mail preparation changes for compliance with the price cap rules.

Single source publication will allow the Commission to independently review mail preparation changes and will, in most circumstances, eliminate the need to have parties initiate motions to bring such changes to the Commission's attention. Accordingly, the revised proposed rule eliminates the separate procedural component for motions concerning mail preparation changes. This change was triggered by commenter concerns over a potentially duplicative procedural rule that would conflict with the Commission's existing procedures and authority to review mail preparation changes for compliance with the price cap rules. The Commission submits that the existing procedures available to interested parties should be sufficient to raise issues of price cap compliance for mail preparation changes. Mailers may notify the Commission using the general motion procedures set forth in § 3001.21 of this chapter if they disagree with the Postal Service's determination of compliance with § 3010.23(d)(2). The rules under § 3001.21 of this chapter require motions to “set forth with particularity the ruling or relief sought, the grounds and basis therefor, and the statutory or other authority relied upon . . .” Accordingly, any motions filed under § 3001.21 of this chapter concerning mail preparation changes shall provide all information the mailers have to rebut the Postal Service's determination, consistent with the Commission's standard set forth in Order No. 3047. The Commission shall weigh the available evidence and provide a determination as soon as practicable based on a preponderance of the evidence standard.

The initial NPR was intended to create a streamlined process by which mailers could submit, and the Commission could review, challenges to the Postal Service's failure to designate a mail preparation requirement change as having a rate effect under § 3010.23(d)(2). However, as submitted by the commenters, the Commission's rules already provide numerous avenues for interested parties to raise issues relating to price cap compliance of mail preparation requirement changes, making an additional procedure redundant. The initial NPR would not foreclose any party from utilizing existing procedures and, as informed by the comments, would not be effective in practice as originally envisioned by the Commission. Accordingly, the Commission revises the proposed rule to better target the specific goal of ensuring that the Postal Service properly accounts for mail preparation requirement changes under § 3010.23(d)(2).

IV. Comments Requested

Interested persons are invited to provide written comments concerning the proposed rule. The Commission seeks comments on the revised rule, specifically the utility of (1) requiring the Postal Service to publish all mail preparation changes in a single source with an affirmative designation of whether or not the changes require price cap compliance; and (2) the elimination of a separate procedural rule for motions concerning mail preparation requirements.

Comments are due no later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. All comments and suggestions received will be available for review on the Commission's Web site, http://www.prc.gov.

It is ordered:

1. Interested persons may submit comments no later than 30 days from the date of the publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

2. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

By the Commission.

Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 3010

Administrative practice and procedure, Postal Service.

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Commission proposes to amend chapter III of title 39 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 3010—REGULATION OF RATES FOR MARKET DOMINANT PRODUCTS1. The authority citation of part 3010 continues to read as follows:Authority:

(5) Procedures for mail preparation changes. The Postal Service shall provide published notice of all mail preparation changes in a single, publicly available source. The Postal Service shall file notice with the Commission of the source it will use to provide published notice of all mail preparation changes. When providing notice of a mail preparation change, the Postal Service shall affirmatively state whether or not the change requires compliance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section. If raised by the Commission or challenged by a mailer, the Postal Service must demonstrate, by a preponderance of the evidence, that a mail preparation change does not require compliance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section in any proceeding where compliance is at issue.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this document announces the Agricultural Marketing Service's (AMS) intention to request an extension and revision to currently approved forms used by importers of commodities that are exempt from section 8e import regulations.

DATES:

Comments on this notice are due by May 30, 2017 to be assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES:

Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning this notice. Comments must be sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Fax: (202) 720-8938; or Internet: www.regulations.gov. Comments should reference the docket number and the date and page number of this issue of the Federal Register and will be available for public inspection in the Office of the Docket Clerk during regular business hours, or can be viewed at: www.regulations.gov. All comments submitted in response to this notice will be included in the record and will be made available to the public. Please be advised that the identity of individuals or entities submitting the comments will be made public on the internet at the address provided above.

Title: Specified Commodities Imported Into the United States Exempt from Import Requirements.

OMB Number: 0581-0167.

Expiration Date of Approval: August 31, 2017.

Type of Request: Extension and revision of a currently approved information collection.

Abstract: Section 8e of the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674; Act) requires that whenever the Secretary of Agriculture issues grade, size, quality, or maturity regulations under domestic marketing orders, the same or comparable regulations must be issued for imported commodities. Import regulations apply only during those periods when domestic marketing order regulations are in effect.

The following commodities are subject to section 8e import regulations: Avocados; grapefruit; kiwifruit; olives (other than Spanish-style); oranges; table grapes; Irish potatoes; onions; tomatoes; dates (other than dates for processing); walnuts; raisins; pistachios; and hazelnuts (filberts). Imports of these commodities are exempt from section 8e requirements if they are imported for such outlets as processing, charity, animal feed, seed, and distribution to relief agencies.

Safeguard procedures in the form of importer and receiver reporting requirements are used to ensure that the imported commodities are, in fact, shipped to authorized, exempt outlets. Reports required under the safeguard procedure are similar to the reports currently required by most domestic marketing orders, and are required of importers and receivers under the following import regulations: (1) Fruits; import regulations (7 CFR 944.350); (2) vegetables; import regulations (7 CFR 980.501); and (3) specialty crops; import regulations (7 CFR 999.500).

Under these regulations, importers intending to import commodities for exempt purposes must complete the “Importer's Exempt Commodity Form” form. In the previous renewal, the form was denoted as FV-6. As AMS's program name has changed from Fruit and Vegetable Program (FV) to Specialty Crops Program (SC), the form will also change from FV-6 to SC-6. SC-6 is submitted to AMS through the Compliance and Enforcement Management System (CEMS). CEMS is an internet-based application which allows importers and receivers of fruit, vegetable, and specialty crops to complete the form online. If an importer correctly inputs their shipment data into CEMS, they will receive and be able to print a certificate that accompanies the shipment. Data elements are simultaneously transmitted to the receiver and to AMS, where they are reviewed for compliance purposes by Marketing Order and Agreement Division (MOAD) staff. The receiver retains a copy for recordkeeping purposes.

In rare instances a paper form SC-6 may be used. The hardcopy form has four parts, which are distributed as follows: Copy one is presented to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security; copy two is filed with MOAD within two days of the commodity entering the United States; copy three accompanies the exempt shipment to its intended destination, where the receiver certifies its receipt and that it will be used for exempt purposes, and files that copy with MOAD within two days of receipt; and copy four is retained by the importer.

In addition to renewing the SC-6 form, this information collection package does the same for the SC-7 form, “Civil Penalty Stipulation Agreement.” Title 7, United States Code, Section 601-674 of the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to assess a civil penalty of not more than $1,100 per violation against any person who violates the Section 8e regulations. Investigators complete the form identifying the violation committed by the produce importer. Produce importers sign the SC-7 form to agree to pay the sum in full settlement. There is no burden associated as only a signature is required.

The information collected through this package is used primarily by authorized representatives of the USDA, including AMS Specialty Crops Program regional and headquarters staff.

Estimate of Burden: The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 5 minutes per response.

Respondents: Importers and receivers of exempt commodities. Based on the information collected on the frequency of use for the forms, AMS has revised estimates of respondents and responses. Estimates of respondents and responses are calculated by taking the raw annual data collected from inspections on Section 8e crops entering the U.S. market and finding the three-year averages. These numbers represent an approximation of the annual burden given the frequent changes in number of respondents and responses from year to year. These estimates differ from the 2014 renewal burden as the numbers were compiled based on the highest number of respondents who could use the form and their frequencies instead of averages.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 79.

Estimated Number of Total Annual Responses: 6,867.

Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 87.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 568 hours.

Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

All comments to this document will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval, and will become a matter of public record.

The Plant Variety Protection Act (PVPA) (7 U.S.C. 2321 et seq.) provides legal protection in the form of intellectual property rights to developers of new varieties of plants, which are reproduced sexually by seed or are tuber-propagated. A Certificate of Plant Variety Protection is awarded to an owner of a crop variety after an examination shows that it is new, distinct from other varieties, and genetically uniform and stable through successive generations. The term of protection is 20 years for most crops and 25 years for trees, shrubs, and vines.

The PVPA also provides for a statutory Board (7 U.S.C. 2327) to be appointed by the Secretary of Agriculture. The duties of the Board are to: (1) Advise the Secretary concerning the adoption of rules and regulations to facilitate the proper administration of the Act; (2) provide advisory counsel to the Secretary on appeals concerning decisions on applications by the PVP Office and on requests for emergency public-interest compulsory licenses; and (3) advise the Secretary on any other matters under the Regulations and Rules of Practice and on all questions under Section 44 of the Act, “Public Interest in Wide Usage” (7 U.S.C. 2404). Renewing the PVP Board is necessary and in the public interest.

The PVPA provides that “the Board shall consist of individuals who are experts in various areas of varietal development covered by this Act.” The Board membership “shall include farmer representation and shall be drawn approximately equally from the private or seed industry sector and from the sector of government or the public.” The Board consists of 14 members, each of whom is appointed for a 2-year period, with no member appointed for more than three 2-year periods. Nominations are made by farmers' associations, trade associations in the seed industry, professional associations representing expertise in seed technology, plant breeding, and variety development, public and private research and development institutions (13 members) and the USDA (one member).

Equal opportunity practices, in agreement with USDA nondiscrimination policies, will be followed in all membership appointments to the Board. To ensure that the suggestions of the Board have taken into account the needs of the diverse groups served by USDA, membership shall include, to the extent practicable, individuals with demonstrated ability to represent minorities, women, and persons with disabilities.

The Charter for the PVP Board will be available on the Web site at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/PVPO or may be requested by contacting the individual identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice.

USDA prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, or audiotape.) should contact USDA's Target Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TTY).

To file a written complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call 202-720-5964 (voice and TTY). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

This notice announces the surplus and purchased foods that the Department expects to make available for donation to States for use in providing nutrition assistance to the needy under The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) in Fiscal Year (FY) 2017. The foods made available under this notice must, at the discretion of the State, be distributed to eligible recipient agencies (ERAs) for use in preparing meals and/or for distribution to households for home consumption.

In accordance with the provisions set forth in the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (EFAA), 7 U.S.C. 7501, et seq., and the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, 7 U.S.C. 2036, the Department makes foods available to States for use in providing nutrition assistance to those in need through TEFAP. In accordance with section 214 of the EFAA, 7 U.S.C. 7515, 60 percent of each State's share of TEFAP foods is based on the number of people with incomes below the poverty level within the State and 40 percent on the number of unemployed persons within the State. State officials are responsible for establishing the network through which the foods will be used by ERAs in providing nutrition assistance to those in need and for allocating foods among those ERAs. States have full discretion in determining the amount of foods that will be made available to ERAs for use in preparing meals and/or for distribution to households for home consumption.

The types of foods the Department expects to make available to States for distribution through TEFAP in FY 2017 are described below.

Surplus Foods

Surplus foods donated for distribution under TEFAP are Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) foods purchased under the authority of section 416 of the Agricultural Act of 1949, 7 U.S.C. 1431 (section 416) and foods purchased under the surplus removal authority of section 32 of the Act of August 24, 1935, 7 U.S.C. 612c (section 32). The types of foods typically purchased under section 416 include dairy, grains, oils, and peanut products. The types of foods purchased under section 32 include meat, poultry, fish, vegetables, dry beans, juices, and fruits.

Approximately $115.7 million in surplus foods acquired in FY 2016 are being delivered to States in FY 2017. These foods include blueberries, cherries, cranberry juice, grape juice, grapefruit juice, orange juice, raisins, cheese, eggs, chicken, and salmon. Other surplus foods may be made available to TEFAP throughout the year. The Department would like to point out that food acquisitions are based on changing agricultural market conditions; therefore, the availability of foods is subject to change.

Purchased Foods

In accordance with section 27 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, 7 U.S.C. 2036, the Secretary is directed to purchase an estimated $299 million worth of foods in FY 2017 for distribution through TEFAP. These foods are made available to States in addition to those surplus foods which otherwise might be provided to States for distribution under TEFAP.

The amounts of each item purchased will depend on the prices the Department must pay, as well as the quantity of each item requested by the States. Changes in agricultural market conditions may result in the availability of additional types of foods or the non-availability of one or more types listed above.

Notice of approval of the Revised Land Management Plan for the Francis Marion National Forest.

SUMMARY:

John Richard “Rick” Lint, the Forest Supervisor for the Francis Marion National Forest, Southern Region, signed the Record of Decision (ROD) for the Revised Land Management Plan (Forest Plan) for the Francis Marion National Forest. The Final ROD documents the rationale for approving the Forest Plan and is consistent with the Reviewing Officers' responses to objections and instructions.

DATES:

The Revised Land Managmenent Plan for the Francis Marion National Forest will become effective 30 days after the publication of this notice of approval in the Federal Register (36 CFR 219.17(a)(1)). To view the final ROD, final environmental impact statement (FEIS), the revised land management plan, and other related documents, please visit the Francis Marion National Forest Web site at: https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/scnfs/landmanagement/planning/?cid=stelprdb5393142.

A legal notice of approval is also being published in the Francis Marion and Sumter National Forests newspaper of record, The State. A copy of this legal notice will be posted on the Web site described above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Further information about the revised land management plan for the Francis Marion Nation Forest can obtained by contacting Mary Morrison, Forest Planner, Francis Marion National Forest at 803-561-4000. Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. (Eastern time), Monday through Friday. Written requests for information may be sent to Francis Marion and Sumter National Forests, Attn: FM Plan Revision, 4931 Broad River Road, Columbia, SC 29212.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Francis Marion National Forest covers nearly 260,000 acres in Berkeley and Charleston Counties, South Carolina. The revised land management plan, which was developed pursuant to the 2012 Forest Planning Rule (36 CFR 219), will replace the land management plan approved in 1996. This 2017 land management plan establishes a strong commitment to an all-lands approach and emphasizes the restoration of longleaf pine, maintaining habitats for at-risk plants and animals, and providing social opportunities and economic benefits to both forest visitors and local communities in coastal South Carolina. The plan components were developed using best available scientific information and the consideration of fiscal capability.

A draft record of decision, revised land management plan and final environmental impact statement were released in August 2016, which was subject to a pre-decisional objection period. One objection was received and the two Reviewing Officers responses to the objection issues were signed by the Associate Deputy Chief (as Reviewing Officer for the Chief) and the Regional Forester in December 2016. The instructions from the Reviewing Officers were incorporated into an updated revised land management plan and final environmental impact statement, and these documents were released to the public in January 2017. The changes that were made as a result of the objection resolution include providing additional standards and direction to the revised plan concerning the management of at-risk species, and clarifications on the evaluation of ecological sustainability were added to the final environmental impact statement. The Final Record of Decision to approve the revised land management plan for the Francis Marion National Forest has now been signed, and is available at the Web site described above.

Responsible Official

The responsible official for the revision of the land management plan for the Francis Marion National Forest is John Richard “Rick” Lint, Forest Supervisor, Francis Marion and Sumter National Forests, 4931 Broad River Road, Columbia, SC 29212.

The Rocky Mountain Regional Forester intends to prepare a Supplement to the Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the Shoshone National Forest Revised Land Management Plan. This notice briefly describes the background, purpose and need for action, what is being proposed, and the nature of the decision to be made. Also, the direction restricting pack goat use contained in the May 6, 2015 Revised Forest Plan is hereby retracted along with any references to the 2009 Payette RADT and the 2012 and 2013 Shoshone RADTs.

DATES:

The draft SEIS is expected in April 2017 and the final SEIS is expected in August 2017.

On May 6, 2015, the Rocky Mountain Regional Forester signed the Record of Decision (ROD) revising the Shoshone National Forest Land Management Plan (LMP).

The May 6, 2015 Revised LMP included standards and guidelines restricting the use of recreational pack goats, and domestic sheep and goat grazing, where it was determined that there was unacceptable risk of disease transmission from the pack goats or domestic sheep to bighorn sheep. Bighorn sheep are a sensitive species on the Shoshone National Forest.

In June 2015, the North American Packgoat Association joined the Idaho Wool Growers Association and filed a Motion for Contempt with the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho. The plaintiffs alleged that the Forest Service improperly relied on a report that the Court had previously found to be in violation of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) when the Shoshone National Forest prepared its 2012 and 2013 Risk Assessment of Disease Transmission (RADT) reports, which the Shoshone relied upon for the bighorn sheep analysis in the forest plan revision effort. The Idaho District Court's 2009 decision prohibited the Forest Service from relying on the findings and conclusions of two Payette reports that pertained to disease transmission between domestic sheep and bighorn sheep on the Payette National Forest.

In February 2016, the District Court granted plaintiff's motion for contempt finding that the Shoshone RADT reports had relied on the findings and conclusions in the Payette reports. On July 9, 2016, the parties agreed to a stipulated settlement.

In accordance with the July 2016 Stipulated Settlement Agreement, the direction restricting pack goat use contained in the May 6, 2015 Revised Forest Plan is hereby retracted along with any references to the 2009 Payette RADT and the 2012 and 2013 Shoshone RADT reports.

The Regional Forester must now consider whether the revised Forest Plan should include direction regarding management of domestic sheep and goats to limit the potential for disease transmission to bighorn sheep, and, if so, whether there are differences in the potential for disease transmission from domestic sheep, domestic goats, or packgoats, to wild bighorn sheep that warrant different management approaches.

The Regional Forester will prepare a Supplement to the Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) and a new RADT report consistent with the National Environmental Policy Act and all applicable laws and regulations pertinent to the revision of the Shoshone LMP. The SEIS will document analysis of the potential for disease transmission between domestic sheep, domestic goats, and packgoats; and wild bighorn sheep on the Shoshone National Forest. The analysis shall consider whether there are differences in the potential for disease transmission by domestic sheep, domestic goats, and packgoats to wild bighorn sheep.

Purpose and Need for Action

The purpose of the federal action being considered here is to determine what, if any, use by domestic sheep, domestic goats, or pack goats is appropriate within the Shoshone National Forest and what direction, if any, should be included in the revised LMP. The need for this action was driven by the 2016 Stipulated Settlement Agreement and will be accomplished by analyzing the risk of disease transmission from domestic sheep and goats and pack goats to bighorn sheep.

Proposed Action

The Shoshone National Forest proposes to limit areas where domestic sheep allotments are stocked and restrict the use of domestic goats and packgoats on the Shoshone National Forest in order to reduce the risk of disease transmission to bighorn sheep. These restrictions would be incorporated into the LMP through the following plan components:

Desired Condition—Low risk of disease transmission from domestic sheep and/or goats within the Shoshone national Forest.

SENS-Guideline-03—On bighorn sheep crucial winter range, management activities that disturb bighorn sheep should be conducted outside the season of use (December 1 through April 30), or designed to reduce disturbance to bighorn sheep when the activity is necessary to sustain or improve bighorn sheep crucial winter range conditions.

SENS-Guideline-06—Restrict disturbances near concentrated bighorn sheep lambing areas between April 1 and June 30 with a minimum distance of 1 mile from the lambing site. Short-term projects designed to improve bighorn sheep habitat such as prescribed burning may be exempt.

SENS-Guideline-12—Outfitter and guide authorizations for recreational goat packing in core bighorn sheep ranges will not be issued.

Management Approach—A wildlife program emphasis for bighorn sheep is to reduce the risk of disease transmission from domestic sheep and goats to bighorn sheep. There is a concern about the risk of disease transmission to bighorn sheep from domestic goats used for packing. To minimize that risk, guidelines are applied for domestic pack goats within the Shoshone National Forest; domestic sheep and goat grazing has been removed from core native bighorn sheep ranges. Authorizations for pack goat use in core bighorn sheep ranges will not be issued.

Possible Alternatives

Alternative 1, No Action: There would be no change in domestic sheep management and packgoat use would be allowed on the Shoshone National Forest.

Alternative 2, Proposed Action: Domestic sheep and domestic goat grazing would be allowed on the current allotment allocated for sheep and goats. Packgoat use would be prohibited from core native bighorn sheep ranges.

Alternative 3: Domestic sheep and domestic goat grazing would be allowed on the current allotment allocated for sheep and goats. Packgoat use would be prohibited from core native bighorn sheep ranges and approved through a permit process once a scientifically proven and viable mitigation is developed and approved.

Based upon the effects of the alternatives, the responsible official will decide how to address the potential risk of disease transmission from domestic sheep and goats, and packgoats to bighorn sheep.

Scoping Process

The Regional Forester will rely on the previous scoping efforts conducted in preparation for the Environmental Impact Statement for the Shoshone National Forest Plan Revision.

Preliminary Issues

There is potential for disease transmission from domestic sheep, domestic goats, and pack goats, to wild bighorn sheep.

There are differences in the potential for disease transmission by domestic sheep, domestic goats or pack goats to bighorn sheep.

There are minimal options for reducing potential for contact and disease transmission.

Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent Environmental Review: A draft supplemental environmental impact statement will be prepared for comment. The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will be 90 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in the Federal Register.

The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of draft environmental impact statements must structure their participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the draft environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may be waived or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these court rulings, it is very important that those interested in this proposed action participate by the close of the 90-day comment period so that substantive comments and objections are made available to the Forest Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and respond to them in the final environmental impact statement.

To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may wish to refer to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.

Comments received, including the names and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposal and will be available for public inspection.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Rural Housing Service's intention to request an extension for a currently approved information collection in support of the program.

DATES:

Comments on this notice must be received by May 30, 2017 to be assured of consideration.

Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved information collection and recordkeeping requirements.

Abstract: Private lenders make the loans to public bodies and nonprofit corporations for the purposes of improving rural living standards and for other purposes that create employment opportunities in rural areas. Eligibility for this program includes community facilities located in cities, towns, or unincorporated areas with a population of up to 20,000 inhabitants.

The information collected is used by the agency to manage, plan, evaluate, and account for government resources. The reports are required to ensure the proper and judicious use of public funds.

Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 18 hours per response.

Respondents: Lending institutions.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 680.

Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 6.

Estimated Number of Responses: 2,797.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 12,401 hours.

Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Jeanne Jacobs, Regulations and Paperwork Management Branch, Support Services Division at (202) 692-0040.

Comments

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of RHS, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of RHS's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments may be sent to Jeanne Jacobs, Regulations and Paperwork Management Branch, Support Services Division, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, STOP 0742, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20250-0742. All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

The Broadcasting Board of Governors (Board) will be meeting at the time and location listed above. The Board will vote on a consent agenda consisting of the minutes of its November 30, 2016 meeting, a resolution honoring Voice of America's (VOA) 75th anniversary, a resolution honoring VOA's Russian Service 70th anniversary, a resolution honoring VOA's Somali Service 10th anniversary, a resolution honoring Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty's Afghan Service 15th anniversary, and a resolution honoring Middle East Broadcasting Networks' Radio Sawa 15th anniversary. The Board will receive a report from the Chief Executive Officer and Director of BBG.

This meeting will be available for public observation via streamed webcast, both live and on-demand, on the agency's public Web site at www.bbg.gov. Information regarding this meeting, including any updates or adjustments to its starting time, can also be found on the agency's public Web site.

The public may also attend this meeting in person at the address listed above as seating capacity permits. Members of the public seeking to attend the meeting in person must register at https://www.eventbrite.com/e/meeting-of-the-broadcasting-board-of-governors-april-6-100-pm-tickets-32922450937 by 12:00 p.m. (EDT) on April 5. For more information, please contact BBG Public Affairs at (202) 203-4400 or by email at pubaff@bbg.gov.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Persons interested in obtaining more information should contact Oanh Tran at (202) 203-4545.

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act that the Iowa Advisory Committee (Committee) will hold a meeting on Monday, April 17, 2017, at 1:00 p.m. CST for the purpose of a discussion on voting rights laws affecting the state.

DATES:

The meeting will be held on Monday, April 17, 2017, at 1:00 p.m. CST.

ADDRESSES:

Public Call Information: Dial: 888-599-4884, Conference ID: 9564291.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David Barreras, DFO, at dbarreras@usccr.gov or 312-353-8311.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Members of the public can listen to the discussion. This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-free call-in number: 888-599-4884, conference ID: 9564291. Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. The conference call operator will ask callers to identify themselves, the organization they are affiliated with (if any), and an email address prior to placing callers into the conference room. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

Members of the public are also entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Midwestern Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 55 W. Monroe St., Suite 410, Chicago, IL 60615. They may also be faxed to the Commission at (312) 353-8324, or emailed to Carolyn Allen at callen@usccr.gov. Persons who desire additional information may contact the Midwestern Regional Office at (312) 353-8311.

Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Midwestern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via www.facadatabase.gov under the Commission on Civil Rights, Iowa Advisory Committee link: (http://www.facadatabase.gov/committee/committee.aspx?cid=248&aid=17). Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's Web site, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Midwestern Regional Office at the above email or street address.

On November 30, 2016, Brake Parts Inc. submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the FTZ Board for its facility within FTZ 226—Site 14, in Patterson, California.

The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including notice in the Federal Register inviting public comment (81 FR 88211-88212, December 7, 2016). The FTZ Board has determined that no further review of the activity is warranted at this time. The production activity described in the notification is authorized, subject to the FTZ Act and the FTZ Board's regulations, including section 400.14.

The County of Monroe, New York, grantee of FTZ 141, submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the FTZ Board on behalf of Xerox Corporation (Xerox) located within Subzone 141B in Webster, New York. The notification conforming to the requirements of the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR 400.22) was received on March 17, 2017.

Xerox already has authority to produce copiers/printers and certain components, xerographic bulk toner, toner cartridges and photoreceptors within Subzone 141B. The current request would add foreign-status materials/components to the scope of authority. Pursuant to 15 CFR 400.14(b), additional FTZ authority would be limited to the specific foreign-status materials/components described in the submitted notification (as described below) and subsequently authorized by the FTZ Board.

Production under FTZ procedures could exempt Xerox from customs duty payments on the foreign-status materials/components used in export production. On its domestic sales, Xerox would be able to choose the duty rates during customs entry procedures that apply to copiers/printers and certain components, xerographic bulk toner, toner cartridges and photoreceptors (duty rates range from duty-free to 6.5%) for the foreign-status materials/components noted below. Customs duties also could possibly be deferred or reduced on foreign-status production equipment.

Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the FTZ Board's Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is May 10, 2017.

A copy of the notification will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 21013, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230-0002, and in the “Reading Room” section of the FTZ Board's Web site, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz.

For further information, contact Diane Finver at Diane.Finver@trade.gov or (202) 482-1367.

On November 30, 2016, Brake Parts Inc submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the FTZ Board for its facility within Subzone 24E, in Hazleton, Pennsylvania.

The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including notice in the Federal Register inviting public comment (81 FR 88212-88213, December 7, 2016). The FTZ Board has determined that no further review of the activity is warranted at this time. The production activity described in the notification is authorized, subject to the FTZ Act and the FTZ Board's regulations, including Section 400.14.

National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Commerce.

ACTION:

Notice of public meeting.

SUMMARY:

The Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology (VCAT or Committee), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), will meet by webinar in an open session on Monday, May 8, 2017 from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The VCAT is composed of not fewer than 9 members appointed by the NIST Director, a majority of whom are eminent in such fields as business, research, new product development, engineering, labor, education, management consulting, environment, and international relations.

DATES:

The VCAT will meet on Monday, May 8, 2017, from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be conducted by webinar. Please note instructions under the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice for participation.

The purpose of this meeting is for the VCAT to review and make recommendations regarding general policy for NIST, its organization, its budget, and its programs within the framework of applicable national policies as set forth by the President and the Congress. The agenda will include an update of the Committee's progress in addressing NIST's role in the Administration's priorities in the areas of trade, innovation and competitiveness through fundamental measurement research and development, and communications, and a discussion on next steps. The agenda may change to accommodate Committee business. The final agenda will be posted on the NIST Web site at http://www.nist.gov/director/vcat/agenda.cfm.

Members of the public can listen to the discussion. The meeting is available to the public through a toll-free call-in number. When you register by email to Mrs. Serena Martinez, serena.martinez@nist.gov, with your name, organization affiliated with (if any), and email address, the toll-free call-in information, including passcode, will be provided to you. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Committee will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charges for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free call-in number. Individuals and representatives of organizations who would like to offer comments and suggestions related to the Committee's affairs are invited to request a place on the agenda by email to stephanie.shaw@nist.gov, no later than May 1, 2017 by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time. Approximately fifteen minutes will be reserved for public comments and speaking times will be assigned on a first-come, first-serve basis. The amount of time per speaker will be determined by the number of requests received, but is likely to be about 3 minutes each. The exact time for public comments will be included in the final agenda that will be posted on the NIST Web site at http://www.nist.gov/director/vcat/agenda.cfm. Questions from the public will not be considered during this period. Speakers who wish to expand upon their oral statements, and those who had wished to speak but could not be accommodated on the agenda, are invited to submit written statements to VCAT, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, MS 1060, Gaithersburg, Maryland, 20899, via fax at 301-216-0529 or electronically by email to stephanie.shaw@nist.gov.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION:

Notice of public meetings.

SUMMARY:

The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold two training workshops for its for-hire advisory panel members and other for-hire operators for purposes of providing instruction on electronic reporting of for-hire Vessel Trip Reports (VTRs).

DATES:

The meetings will be held Tuesday, April 25, 2017 and Thursday April 27, 2017, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

ADDRESSES:

The workshops will be held: Tuesday, April 25, at the Hilton Mystic Hotel 20 Coogan Blvd., Mystic CT 06355; phone: (860) 572-0731. Thursday, April 27, at the Doubletree by Hilton Baltimore-BWI Airport, 890 Elkridge Landing Rd., Linthicum Heights, MD 21090; phone: (410) 859-8400. Participation is limited to 30 individuals in each workshop due to space limitations. To ensure attendance, please register at http://www.mafmc.org/forms/evtr-workshop-registration or email the workshop coordinator at aloftus@andrewloftus.com.

The Council has submitted a Regulatory Omnibus Framework Adjustment to NMFS requiring that for-hire vessels submit VTRs electronically starting 6 months following publication of the final rule in the Federal Register for all Council-managed fisheries that require for-hire VTR reporting. This action would change the method of transmitting VTRs—the required data elements would not change. VTRs would be required to be completed before arriving at the dock, and electronic reports would have to be submitted within 48 hours after docking. These workshops will provide training for the Council's for-hire advisory panel members and the public in preparation for this action.

Special Accommodations

These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aid should be directed to M. Jan Saunders, (302) 526-5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

5. Review Snapper Grouper Amendment 43 (management options for red snapper and recreational reporting) and consider the Council request to work with the Southeast Fisheries Science Center (SEFSC) to explore approaches for obtaining an ABC for red snapper.

6. Discuss uncertainty in the Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) estimates and a future joint SSC meeting with the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council's SSC.

7. Review the South Atlantic Research Plan and make research recommendations.

11. Receive updates and progress reports on ongoing Council amendments and activities, including the Citizen Science Program.

Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during these meetings. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.

Written comment on SSC agenda topics is to be distributed to the Committee through the Council office, similar to all other briefing materials. Written comment to be considered by the SSC shall be provided to the Council office no later than one week prior to an SSC meeting. For this meeting, the deadline for submission of written comment is 12 p.m., Tuesday, April 18, 2017.

Multiple opportunities for comment on agenda items will be provided during SSC meetings. Open comment periods will be provided at the start of the meeting and near the conclusion. Those interested in providing comment should indicate such in the manner requested by the Chair, who will then recognize individuals to provide comment. Additional opportunities for comment on specific agenda items will be provided, as each item is discussed, between initial presentations and SSC discussion. Those interested in providing comment should indicate such in the manner requested by the Chair, who will then recognize individuals to provide comment. All comments are part of the record of the meeting.

Special Accommodations

These meetings are accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for auxiliary aids should be directed to the SAFMC office (see ADDRESSES) at least 10 business days prior to the meeting.

Note:

The times and sequence specified in this agenda are subject to change.

This committee's charter is being renewed in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended) and 41 CFR 102-3.50(d). The charter and contact information for the Board's Designated Federal Officer (DFO) can be obtained at http://www.facadatabase.gov/.

The Board provides the Secretary of Defense, through the Secretary of the Army and the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, independent advice and recommendations on matters relating to construction and rehabilitation priorities and spending levels on the commercial navigation features and components of the U.S. inland waterways and inland harbors. Pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 2251(a), the Board shall be composed of eleven members, who shall be appointed as representative members as directed by 33 U.S.C. 2251(f)(2). Members shall be primary commercial users and shippers of the inland and intracoastal waterways. Commercial users and shippers invited to serve on the Board shall designate an individual, subject to Secretary of Defense approval, to represent the organization's interests. Members who are full-time or permanent part-time Federal officers or employees are appointed pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.130(a) to serve as regular government employee members. Each member is appointed to provide advice on behalf of the Government on the basis of their best judgment without representing any particular point of view and in a manner that is free from conflict of interest. Except for reimbursement of official Board-related travel and per diem, members serve without compensation. The DoD, as necessary and consistent with the Board's mission and DoD policies and procedures, may establish subcommittees, task forces, or working groups to support the Board, and all subcommittees must operate under the provisions of FACA and the Government in the Sunshine Act. Subcommittees will not work independently of the Board and must report all recommendations and advice solely to the Board for full deliberation and discussion. Subcommittees, task forces, or working groups have no authority to make decisions and recommendations, verbally or in writing, on behalf of the Board. No subcommittee or any of its members can update or report, verbally or in writing, directly to the DoD or any Federal officers or employees. The Board's DFO, pursuant to DoD policy, must be a full-time or permanent part-time DoD employee, and must be in attendance for the duration of each and every Board/subcommittee meeting. The public or interested organizations may submit written statements to the Board membership about the Board's mission and functions. Such statements may be submitted at any time or in response to the stated agenda of planned Board meetings. All written statements must be submitted to the Board's DFO who will ensure the written statements are provided to the membership for their consideration.

Needs and Uses: To ensure that each victim-related inquiry is answered in a timely manner, the Victim Related Inquiry (VRI) system is used to track and maintain the communication between SAPRO, the inquirer, and the agency that the inquiry is referred to, as well as records documenting permission for SAPRO.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet Seehra.

Comments and recommendations on the proposed information collection should be emailed to Ms. Jasmeet Seehra, DoD Desk Officer, at Oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. Please identify the proposed information collection by DoD Desk Officer and the Docket ID number and title of the information collection.

You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method:

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, Docket ID number and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

DOD Clearance Officer: Mr. Frederick Licari.

Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Mr. Licari at WHS/ESD Directives Division, 4800 Mark Center Drive, East Tower, Suite 03F09, Alexandria, VA 22350-3100.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing a new information collection.

DATES:

Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before May 30, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2017-ICCD-0046. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., LBJ, Room 224-84, Washington, DC 20202-4537.

The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

Title of Collection: Impact Evaluation of Parent Messaging Strategies on Student Attendance.

Abstract: Most school districts have policies in place to systematically address student absenteeism, which remains a considerable problem across grade levels in many parts of the country. Typical attendance practices include parent notification by letters, phone calls, parent meetings, home visitation, and, for students with significant numbers of absences, referrals to truancy programs and family courts. Such practices can be costly.

Text messaging interventions are becoming increasingly popular—in fields such as public health and prevention—due to their low cost, scalability, and evidence of impact. School districts have increasing capacity to use technology to implement messaging interventions. Thus, an evaluation to determine whether a text messaging intervention can improve student attendance in a cost effective manner is warranted.

To our knowledge, this project is the first multidistrict random assignment study of the impact of a text messaging intervention for parents on student attendance and achievement. In addition, consistent with the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (Pub. L. 113-235), which provides the legislative authority to conduct this study, this study will focus on low-performing schools with high levels of poverty and student absenteeism.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing a new information collection.

DATES:

Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before May 30, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2017-ICCD-0045. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., LBJ, Room 224-84, Washington, DC 20202-4537.

The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

Title of Collection: Impact Evaluation of Academic Language Intervention.

Abstract: The purpose of the Impact Evaluation of Academic Language Intervention is to assess the impact of a promising academic language intervention on teachers' instructional practice and students' language and reading skills, with a particular focus on students who are English Learners (ELs) and disadvantaged non-EL students. Although prior studies of academic language instruction provide some initial evidence of the efficacy of instructional practices, confirmation of large-scale effectiveness is needed. This evaluation will contribute to the knowledge base of the instructional practices that improve language and literacy outcomes for these high need populations.

This submission covers data collection for the baseline period prior to implementing the selected academic language intervention, during the implementation year (the 2017-18 school year), and a follow-up year (spring 2019). The evaluation will examine the implementation and impact of an academic language program, using a random assignment design in which participating schools in each district are randomly assigned to a treatment group whose 4th and 5th grade teachers receive training and materials to implement the program or to a control group whose teachers do not. This submission covers the following data collection activities: Teacher surveys, teacher and student rosters, and school district records data.

The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an information collection request (ICR), “NESHAP for Group IV Polymers and Resins (40 CFR part 63, subpart JJJ) (Renewal)” (EPA ICR No. 2457.03, OMB Control No. 2060-0682), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through March 31, 2017. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register (81 FR 26546) on May 3, 2016 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently-valid OMB control number.

EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

Abstract: Owners and operators of affected facilities are required to comply with reporting and record keeping requirements for the General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), as well as the specific requirements at 40 CFR part 63, subpart JJJ. This includes submitting initial notifications, performance tests and periodic reports and results, and maintaining records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These reports are used by EPA to determine compliance with the standards.

Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase in the total estimated burden, labor costs, and capital and O&M costs as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved Burdens. The change in the burden and cost estimates occurred because the previously-approved ICR only covered the burden and costs associated with the 2014 amendment. This ICR combines the burden from both the 2014 amendment and the pre-2014 requirements of the rule.

The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of an existing ICR, which is currently approved through March 31, 2017. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register on May 3, 2016 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently-valid OMB control number.

EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an information collection request (ICR), “NSPS for VOC Emissions from Petroleum Refinery Wastewater Systems (40 CFR part 60, subpart QQQ) (Renewal)” (EPA ICR No. 1136.12, OMB Control No. 2060-0172), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through March 31, 2017. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register (81 FR 26546) on May 3, 2016 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments.

Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

Abstract: The NSPS for Sewage Sludge Incineration (SSI) Units at Subpart LLLL fulfill the requirements of Sections 111 and 129 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), which require EPA to promulgate NSPS for solid waste incineration units. The information collection activities required by the NSPS include: Siting requirements, operator training and qualification requirements, testing, monitoring and reporting requirements, one-time and periodic reports, and the maintenance of records. These activities will enable the Designated Administrator to determine initial compliance with the emission limits for the regulated pollutants, monitor compliance with operating parameters, and ensure that facilities conduct the proper planning and operator training.

Total estimated cost: $694,000 for both annualized capital/startup and operation & maintenance costs.

Changes in the Estimates: There is an adjustment increase in the total estimated burden from the most-recently approved ICR. The increase primarily results from an increase in the number of sources, as this ICR is updated to reflect the total number of SSI units subject to Subpart LLLL based on EPA's 2016 SSI inventory. In addition, this ICR makes several corrections to the number of reports and reporting frequency to ensure consistency in calculating the respondent labor hours, Agency labor hours, and the total number of responses.

The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an information collection request (ICR), “NSPS for Stationary Spark Ignition Internal Combustion Engines” (EPA ICR No. 2227.05, OMB Control No. 2060-0610) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through March 31, 2017. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register (81 FR 26546) on May 3, 2016 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

Abstract: Owners and operators of affected facilities are required to comply with reporting and record keeping requirements for the general provisions of 40 CFR part 60, subpart A, as well as the specific requirements at 40 CFR part 60, subpart JJJJ. This includes submitting initial notifications, performance tests and periodic reports and results, and maintaining records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These reports are used by EPA to determine compliance with the standards.

Changes in the Estimates: There is an adjustment increase in the total estimated burden and labor costs as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved Burdens. The change in burden occurred due to a program change. Beginning in 2015, this rule requires annual reporting for emergency stationary SI ICE that operate under the conditions at § 60.4243(d)(3)(i). This ICR includes burden estimates for the annual reporting requirements. In addition to the program change the burden in this ICR has increased due to an increase in the estimated number of respondents. The number of sources has increased since the last ICR to account for industry growth in the past three years.

There is an increase in the total capital/startup and O&M as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved Burden. This increase has occurred due to an increase in the estimated number of respondents. The number of sources has increased since the last ICR to account for industry growth in the past three years.

The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of an existing ICR, which is currently approved through March 31, 2017. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register on May 3, 2016 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an information collection request (ICR), “NSPS for VOC Emissions from Petroleum Refinery Wastewater Systems (40 CFR part 60, subpart QQQ) (Renewal)” (EPA ICR No. 1136.12, OMB Control No. 2060-0172), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through March 31, 2017. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register (81 FR 26546) on May 3, 2016 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments.

Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov, or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

Abstract: Owners and operators of petroleum refinery wastewater systems are required to keep records of design and operating specifications of all equipment installed to comply with the standards such as water seals, roof seals, control devices, and other equipment. This information is necessary to ensure that equipment design and operation specifications are met, and the source is in compliance with NSPS Subpart QQQ.

Total estimated cost: $19,400 in either annualized capital/startup or operation & maintenance costs.

Changes in the Estimates: There is an adjustment increase in the overall burden in this ICR when compared to the previous ICR. This is due to a correction from 135 in the previous ICR to 149 in this ICR renewal in the estimated number of petroleum refineries subject to the NSPS. This ICR references the most recently available industry information from the Refinery Sector Rule reconsideration and is consistent with the source count for NSPS Subpart J for petroleum refineries. In addition, this ICR assumes all sources will take time to re-familiarize with the regulation each year.

The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an information collection request (ICR), “NESHAP for Benzene Emissions from Benzene Storage Vessels and Coke Oven By-Product Recovery Plants (40 CFR part 61, subparts L and Y) (Renewal)” (EPA ICR No. 1080.15, OMB Control No. 2060-0185), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through March 31, 2017. Public comments were previously-requested via the Federal Register (81 FR 26546) on May 3, 2016 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

Abstract: The affected entities are subject to the General Provisions of the NESHAP (40 CFR part 61, subpart A), and to the Provisions at 40 CFR part 61, subparts L and Y. Owners or operators of the affected facilities must submit a one-time only report of any physical or operational changes, initial performance tests, and periodic reports and results. Owners or operators are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. Reports are required quarterly or semiannually at a minimum.

Total estimated cost: $332,000 (per year), which includes no annualized capital/startup or operation & maintenance costs.

Changes in the Estimates: There is a small adjustment increase in the respondent labor hours in this ICR compared to the previous ICR. The increase is due to a change in Agency assumption in calculating labor hours; this ICR assumes all sources will take time to re-familiarize with the regulation each year. This results in a small overall increase in burden.

The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an information collection request (ICR), “NESHAP for Gold Mine Ore Processing (Renewal)” (EPA ICR No. 2383.04, OMB Control No. 2060-0659), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through March 31, 2017. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register (81 FR 26546) on May 3, 2016 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

Abstract: Owners and operators of affected facilities are required to comply with reporting and record keeping requirements for the General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), as well as for the specific requirements at 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEEEEE. This includes submitting initial notifications, performance tests and periodic reports and results, and maintaining records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These reports are used by EPA to determine compliance with these standards.

Total Estimated Cost: $227,000 in either annualized capital/startup or operation & maintenance costs.

Changes in the Estimates: There is an adjustment increase in the respondent labor hours as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved Burdens. This increase is not due to any program changes. The change in the respondent labor hour estimates occurred for two reasons. First, a labor burden estimate for completing Method 29 testing was added based on comments from the Nevada Mining Association (note: This activity was already required by the rule; however, the previous ICR did not estimate the labor burden for completing the testing). Second, this ICR assumes all existing respondents will have to familiarize with the regulatory requirements each year.

There is a small adjustment decrease of $130 in the total capital and O&M costs as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved Burdens. This decrease occurred because this ICR rounds totals to three significant figures. There is no change in methodology for calculating O&M costs.

NOTE: In accordance with the Sunshine Act, the meeting will be open to public observation of the Commission's deliberations and voting. Seating is limited and it is suggested that visitors arrive 30 minutes before the meeting in order to be processed through security and escorted to the meeting room. (In addition to publishing notices on EEOC Commission meetings in the Federal Register, the Commission also provides information about Commission meetings on its Web site, www.eeoc.gov., and provides a recorded announcement a week in advance on future Commission sessions.)

Please telephone (202) 663-7100 (voice) and (202) 663-4074 (TTY) at any time for information on these meetings. The EEOC provides sign language interpretation and Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) services at Commission meetings for the hearing impaired. Requests for other reasonable accommodations may be made by using the voice and TTY numbers listed above.

As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.

DATES:

Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before May 30, 2017. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.

For additional information about the information collection, contact Nicole Ongele at (202) 418-2991.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

OMB Control Number: 3060-1046.

Title: Part 64, Pay Telephone Reclassification and Compensation Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 469 respondents; 3,725 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 0.50 hours-200 hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion, one-time, annual, and quarterly reporting requirements; third party disclosure requirements; and recordkeeping requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to Obtain or Retain Benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 151, 154 and 276.

Total Annual Burden: 73,494 hours.

Total Annual Cost: No cost.

Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: The Commission is not requesting respondents to submit confidential information. Respondents may request confidential treatment of their information that they believe to be confidential pursuant to 47 CFR 0.459 of the Commission's rules.

Needs and Uses: In the Order on Reconsideration (FCC 04-251), the Commission considered four petitions for reconsideration of our Report and Order. The Report and Order (FCC 03-235) established detailed rules (Payphone Compensation Rules) ensuring that payphone service providers or PSPs are “fairly compensated” for each and every completed payphone-originated call pursuant to section 276 of the Communications Act, as amended (the Act). The Payphone Compensation Rules satisfy section 276 by identifying the party liable for compensation and establishing a mechanism for PSPs to be paid. The Payphone Compensation Rules: (1) Place liability to compensate PSPs for payphone-originated calls on the facilities-based long distance carriers or switch-based resellers (SBRs) from whose switches such calls are completed; (2) define these responsible carriers as “Completing Carriers” and require them to develop their own system of tracking calls to completion, the accuracy of which must be confirmed and attested to by a third-party auditor; (3) require Completing Carriers to file with PSPs a quarterly report and also submit an attestation by the chief financial officer (CFO) that the payment amount for that quarter is accurate and is based on 100% of all completed calls; (4) require quarterly reporting obligations for other facilities-based long distance carriers in the call path, if any, and define these carriers as “Intermediate Carriers;” (5) give parties flexibility to agree to alternative compensation arrangements (ACA) so that small Completing Carriers may avoid the expense of instituting a tracking system and undergoing an audit. The Order on Reconsideration did not change this compensation framework, but rather refined and built upon its approach. While the Commission increased the time carriers must retain certain data and added burden in that regard, the Commission also removed potentially burdensome paperwork requirements by encouraging carriers to comply with the reporting requirements through electronic means. We believe that the clarifications adopted in the Order on Reconsideration significantly decrease the paperwork burden on carriers. Specifically, the Commission did the following: (1) Clarified alternative arrangements for small businesses requiring a Completing Carrier to give the PSP adequate notice of an ACA prior to its effective date with sufficient time for the PSP to object to an ACA, and also prior to the termination of an ACA; (2) clarified any paperwork burdens imposed on carriers allowing Completing Carriers the ability to give PSPs adequate notice of payphone compensation requirements by placing notice on a clearinghouse Web site or through electronic methods; (3) required Completing Carriers and Intermediate Carriers to report only completed calls in their quarterly reports; and (4) extended the time period from 18 to 27 months for Completing Carriers and Intermediate Carriers to retain certain payphone records.

As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.

DATES:

Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before May 30, 2017. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.

For additional information about the information collection, contact Nicole Ongele at (202) 418-2991.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

OMB Control Number: 3060-0986.

Title: High-Cost Universal Service Support.

Form Numbers: FCC Form 481, FCC Form 505, FCC Form 507, FCC Form 508, FCC Form 509, and FCC Form 525.

Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit, not-for-profit institutions and state, local or tribal government.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 1,948 respondents; 14,020 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 0.5 hours-100 hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion, quarterly and annual reporting requirements, recordkeeping requirement and third party disclosure requirement.

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: We note that USAC must preserve the confidentiality of all data obtained from respondents; must not use the data except for purposes of administering the universal service programs; and must not disclose data in company-specific form unless directed to do so by the Commission.

In March 2016, the Commission adopted the Rate-of-Return Reform Order to continue modernizing the universal service support mechanisms for rate-of-return carriers. Connect America Fund et al., WC Docket No. 10-90 et al., Report and Order, Order and Order on Reconsideration and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 31 FCC Rcd 3087 (2016). The Rate-of-Return Reform Order replaces the Interstate Common Line Support (ICLS) mechanism with the Connect America Fund—Broadband Loop Support (CAF-BLS) mechanism. While ICLS supported only lines used to provide traditional voice service (including voice service bundled with broadband service), CAF-BLS also supports consumer broadband-only loops.

We propose to revise this information collection, specifically FCC Form 481 and its instructions to provide clarification for some reporting items and to reflect certain updates. This revision is a narrow expansion of similar information related to the existing approval. There are no changes to FCC Form 505, FCC Form 507, FCC Form 508, FCC Form 509 and FCC Form 525. The Commission also, subject to OMB approval, proposes to move certain reporting requirements from this control number into a new information collection for which OMB approval received recently—3060-1228—Connect America Fund High Cost Portal Filing.

The Federal Communications Commission will hold an Open Meeting on the subjects listed below on Thursday, March 23, 2017 which is scheduled to commence at 10:30 a.m. in Room TW-C305, at 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC.

Summary: The Commission will consider a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Notice of Inquiry that would enable voice service providers to better protect subscribers from illegal and fraudulent robocalls.

Summary: The Commission will consider a Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would adopt rules to facilitate the deployment of technologies used to combat contraband wireless devices in correctional facilities, while seeking comment on additional proposals and solutions.

Summary: The Commission will consider a Report and Order, Notice of Inquiry, Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and Order that would enhance service quality and propose a new provider compensation plan for video relay services.

4WIRELESS TELE-COMMUNICATIONSTitle: Amendment of the Commission's Rules with Regard to the Cellular Service, Including Changes in Licensing of Unserved Area (WT Docket No. 12-40; RM No. 11510); Amendment of the Commission's Rules with Regard to Relocation of Interim Restrictions and Procedures for Cellular Service Applications; Amendment of the Commission's Rules with Regard to Frequency Coordination for the Cellular Service; Amendment of the Commission's Rules Governing Radiated Power Limits for the Cellular Service (RM No. 11660).

Summary: The Commission will consider a Second Report and Order, Report and Order, and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would facilitate mobile broadband deployment, including LTE, promote greater spectrum efficiency, and reduce regulatory burdens and costs.

Summary: The Commission will consider a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that proposes to (1) eliminate the Traffic and Revenue Reports and (2) streamline the Circuit Capacity Reports.

6MEDIATitle: Expanding the Economic and Innovation Opportunities of Spectrum Through Incentive Auctions (GN Docket No. 12-268); Amendments of the Commission's Rules to Establish Rules for Digital Low Power Television and Television Translator Stations (MB Docket No. 03-185); Channel Sharing by Full Power and Class A Stations Outside the Broadcast Television Spectrum Incentive Auction Context (MB Docket No. 15-137).

Summary: The Commission will consider a Report and Order that would authorize channel sharing outside the context of the incentive auction and thus permit stations with auction-related channel sharing agreements to continue to operate if their auction-related agreements expire or otherwise terminate.

7PUBLIC SAFETY & HOMELAND SECURITYPresentation: The Commission will receive an update from the Public Safety & Homeland Security Bureau on the status of its continuing inquiry into the AT&T Mobility 911 outage that occurred on March 8, 2017.Consent Agenda

The Commission will consider the following subjects listed below as a consent agenda and these items will not be presented individually:

1MEDIATitle: WLPC, LLC, Application For Renewal of License For Class A Television Station WLPC-CD, Detroit, Michigan.

Summary: The Commission will consider an Order adopting a Consent Decree which resolves issues regarding potential violations of the Commission's rules and grants the license renewal application of WLPC-CD.

2MEDIATitle: Application of Razorcake/Gorsky Press, Inc. For a New LPFM Station at Pasadena, California.

Summary: The Commission will consider a Memorandum Opinion and Order concerning the denial of objections to an application for a construction permit for a new LPFM station.

Summary: The Commission will consider an Order on Reconsideration concerning the dismissal of the licensee's Application for Review seeking reinstatement of the station's license.

The meeting site is fully accessible to people using wheelchairs or other mobility aids. Sign language interpreters, open captioning, and assistive listening devices will be provided on site. Other reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities are available upon request. In your request, include a description of the accommodation you will need and a way we can contact you if we need more information. Last minute requests will be accepted, but may be impossible to fill. Send an email to: fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (TTY).

Additional information concerning this meeting may be obtained from the Office of Media Relations, (202) 418-0500; TTY 1-888-835-5322. Audio/Video coverage of the meeting will be broadcast live with open captioning over the Internet from the FCC Live Web page at www.fcc.gov/live.

For a fee this meeting can be viewed live over George Mason University's Capitol Connection. The Capitol Connection also will carry the meeting live via the Internet. To purchase these services, call (703) 993-3100 or go to www.capitolconnection.gmu.edu.

The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than April 17, 2017.

The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.

The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than April 27, 2017.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing that a proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES:

Fax written comments on the collection of information by May 1, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

To ensure that comments on the information collection are received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, FAX: 202-395-7285, or emailed to oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. All comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0543. Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for review and clearance.

Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products: Establishment Registration and Listing; Eligibility Determination for Donors; and Current Good Tissue Practice—OMB Control Number 0910-0543—Extension

Under section 361 of the Public Health Service Act (the PHS Act) (42 U.S.C. 264), FDA may issue and enforce regulations necessary to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of communicable diseases between the States or possessions or from foreign countries into the States. As derivatives of the human body, all HCT/Ps pose some risk of carrying pathogens that could potentially infect recipients or handlers. FDA has issued regulations related to HCT/Ps involving establishment registration and listing using Form FDA 3356, eligibility determination for donors, and Current Good Tissue Practice (CGTP).

Establishment Registration and Listing; Form FDA 3356

The regulations in part 1271 (21 CFR part 1271) require domestic and foreign establishments that recover, process, store, label, package, or distribute an HCT/P described in § 1271.10(a), or that perform screening or testing of the cell or tissue donor to register with FDA (§ 1271.10(b)(1)) and submit a list of each HCT/P manufactured (§ 1271.10(b)(2)). Section 1271.21(a) requires an establishment to follow certain procedures for initial registration and listing of HCT/Ps, and § 1271.25(a) and (b) identifies the required initial registration and HCT/P listing information. Section 1271.21(b), in brief, requires an annual update of the establishment registration. Section 1271.21(c)(ii) requires establishments to submit HCT/P listing updates if a change as described in § 1271.25(c) has occurred. Section 1271.25(c) identifies the required HCT/P listing update information. Section 1271.26 requires establishments to submit an amendment if ownership or location of the establishment changes. FDA requires the use of a registration and listing form, Form FDA 3356: Establishment Registration and Listing for Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products (HCT/Ps), to submit the required information (§§ 1271.10, 1271.21, 1271.25, and 1271.26)). To further facilitate the ease and speed of submissions, electronic submission is accepted at http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/EstablishmentRegistration/TissueEstablishmentRegistration/default.htm.

Form FDA 3356 is being revised as follows: (1) Adding import contact information including an email address and phone number; (2) deleting columns related to HCT/Ps subject to registration and listing under 21 CFR part 207 or 807; and (3) revising the instructions accordingly. The estimated burden is not affected by these changes.

Eligibility Determination for Donors

In brief, FDA requires certain HCT/P establishments described in § 1271.1(b) to determine donor eligibility based on donor screening and testing for relevant communicable disease agents and diseases except as provided under § 1271.90. The documented determination of a donor's eligibility is made by a responsible person as defined in § 1271.3(t) and is based on the results of required donor screening, which includes a donor medical history interview (defined in § 1271.3(n)), and testing (§ 1271.50(a)). Certain records must accompany an HCT/P once the donor-eligibility determination has been made (§ 1271.55(a)). This requirement applies both to an HCT/P from a donor who is determined to be eligible as well as to an HCT/P from a donor who is determined to be ineligible or where the donor-eligibility determination is not complete if there is a documented urgent medical need, as defined in § 1271.3(u) (§ 1271.60). Once the donor-eligibility determination has been made, the HCT/P must be accompanied by a summary of records used to make the donor eligibility determination (§ 1271.55(b)), and a statement whether, based on the results of the screening and testing of the donor, the donor is determined to be eligible or ineligible (§ 1271.55(a)(2)). Records used in determining the eligibility of a donor, i.e., results and interpretations of testing for relevant communicable disease agents, the donor-eligibility determination, the name and address of the testing laboratory or laboratories, and the name of the responsible person (defined in § 1271.3(t)) who made the donor-eligibility determination and the date of the determination, must be maintained (§ 1271.55(d)(1)). If any information on the donor is not in English, the original record must be maintained and translated to English, and accompanied by a statement of authenticity by the translator (§ 1271.55(d)(2)). HCT/P establishments must retain the records pertaining to a particular HCT/P at least 10 years after the date of its administration, or, if the date of administration is not known, then at least 10 years after the date of the HCT/P's distribution, disposition, or expiration, whichever is latest (§ 1271.55(d)(4)).

When a product is shipped in quarantine, as defined in § 1271.3(q), before completion of screening and testing, the HCT/P must be accompanied by records identifying the donor stating that the donor-eligibility determination has not been completed and stating that the product must not be implanted, transplanted, infused, or transferred until completion of the donor-eligibility determination, except in cases of urgent medical need, as defined in § 1271.3(u) (§ 1271.60(c)). When a HCT/P is used in cases of documented urgent medical need, the results of any completed donor screening and testing, and a list of any required screening and testing that has not yet been completed also must accompany the HCT/P (§ 1271.60(d)(2)). When a HCT/P is used in cases of urgent medical need or from a donor who has been determined to be ineligible (as permitted under § 1271.65), documentation by the HCT/P establishment is required showing that the recipient's physician received notification that the testing and screening were not complete (in cases of urgent medical need), and upon the completion of the donor-eligibility determination, of the results of the determination (§§ 1271.60(d)(3) and (d)(4), and 1271.65(b)(3)).

An HCT/P establishment is also required to establish and maintain procedures for all steps that are performed in determining eligibility (§ 1271.47(a)), including the use of a product from a donor of viable, leukocyte-rich cells or tissue testing reactive for cytomegalovirus (§ 1271.85(b)(2)). The HCT/P establishment must record and justify any departure from a procedure relevant to preventing risks of communicable disease transmission at the time of its occurrence (§ 1271.47(d)).

Current Good Tissue Practice

FDA requires HCT/P establishments to follow CGTP (§ 1271.1(b)). Section 1271.155(a) permits the submission of a request for FDA approval of an exemption from or an alternative to any requirement in subpart C or D of part 1271. Section 1271.290(c) requires establishments to affix a distinct identification code to each HCT/P that they manufacture that relates the HCT/P to the donor and to all records pertaining to the HCT/P. Whenever an establishment distributes an HCT/P to a consignee, § 1271.290(f) requires the establishment to inform the consignee, in writing, of the product tracking requirements and the methods the establishment uses to fulfill these requirements. Non-reproductive HCT/P establishments described in § 1271.10 are required under § 1271.350(a)(1) and (a)(3) to investigate and report to FDA adverse reactions (defined in § 1271.3(y)) using Form FDA-3500A (§ 1271.350(a)(2)). Form FDA-3500A is approved under OMB control number 0910-0291. Section 1271.370(b) and (c) requires establishments to include specific information either on the HCT/P label or with the HCT/P.

Section 1271.155(f) requires an establishment operating under the terms of an exemption or alternative to maintain documentation of FDA's grant of the exemption or approval and the date on which it began operating under the terms of the exemption or alternative. Section 1271.160(b)(3) requires the quality program of an establishment that performs any step in the manufacture of HCT/Ps to document corrective actions relating to core CGTP requirements. Section 1271.160(b)(6) requires documentation of HCT/P deviations. Section 1271.160(d) requires, in brief, documentation of validation of computer software if the establishment relies upon it to comply with core CGTP requirements. Section 1271.190(d)(2) requires documentation of all cleaning and sanitation activities performed to prevent contamination of HCT/Ps. Section 1271.195(d) requires documentation of environmental control and monitoring activities. Section 1271.200(e) requires documentation of all equipment maintenance, cleaning, sanitizing, calibration, and other activities. Section 1271.210(d) requires, in brief, documentation of the receipt, verification, and use of each supply or reagent. Section 1271.230(a) requires documentation of validation activities and results when the results of processing described in § 1271.220 cannot be fully verified by subsequent inspection and tests. Section 1271.230(c) requires that when changes to a validated process subject to 1271.230(a) occur, documentation of the review and evaluation of the process and revalidation, if necessary, must occur. Section 1271.260(d) and (e) requires documentation of any corrective action taken when proper storage conditions are not met and documentation of the storage temperature for HCT/Ps. Section 1271.265(c)(1) requires documentation that all release criteria have been met before distribution of an HCT/P. Section 1271.265(c)(3) requires documentation of any departure from a procedure relevant to preventing risks of communicable disease transmission at the time of occurrence. Section 1271.265(e) requires documentation of the activities in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, which must include identification of the HCT/P and the establishment that supplied the HCT/P, activities performed and the results of each activity, date(s) of activity, quantity of HCT/P subject to the activity, and disposition of the HCT/P. Section 1271.270(a) requires documentation of each step in manufacturing required in part 1271, subparts C and D. Section 1271.270(e) requires documentation of the name and address, and a list of responsibilities of any establishment that performs a manufacturing step for the establishment. Section 1271.290(d) and (e) require documentation of a method for recording the distinct identification code and type of each HCT/P distributed to a consignee to enable tracking from the consignee to the donor and to enable tracking from the donor to the consignee or final disposition. Section 1271.320(b) requires an establishment to maintain a record of each complaint that it receives. The complaint file must contain sufficient information about each complaint for proper review and evaluation of the complaint and for determining whether the complaint is an isolated event or represents a trend.

Section 1271.420(a) requires importers of HCT/Ps to notify FDA District Director having jurisdiction over the port of entry through which the HCT/Ps are offered for import. The HCT/Ps must be held intact or transported under quarantine until they are inspected and released by FDA.

Respondents to this information collection are establishments that recover, process, store, label, package or distribute any HCT/P, or perform donor screening or testing. The estimates provided are based on most recent available information from FDA's database system and trade organizations. The hours per response and hours per record are based on data provided by the Eastern Research Group, or FDA experience with similar recordkeeping or reporting requirements.

There are an estimated 2,218 HCT/P establishments (conventional tissue, eye tissue, peripheral blood stem cell, stem cell products from cord blood, reproductive tissue, and sperm banks), including 667 manufacturers of HCT/P products regulated under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and section 351 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 262), that have registered and listed with FDA. In addition, we estimate that 182 new establishments have registered with FDA (§§ 1271.10(b)(1) and (b)(2) and 1271.25(a) and (b)). There are an estimated 1,221 listing updates (§§ 1271.10(b)(2), 1271.21(c)(ii), and 1271.25(c)) and 588 location/ownership amendments (§ 1271.26).

Under § 1271.55(a), an estimated total of 2,206,890 HCT/Ps (which include conventional tissues, eye tissues, hematopoetic stem cells/progenitor cells, and reproductive cells and tissues), and an estimated total of 2,066,890 non-reproductive cells and tissues (total HCT/Ps minus reproductive cells and tissues) are distributed per year by an estimated 1,551 establishments (2,218 − 667 = 1,551) with approved applications).

Under § 1271.60(c) and (d)(2), FDA estimates that 1,375 establishments shipped an estimated 572,000 HCT/P under quarantine, and that an estimated 25 establishments requested 78 exemptions from or alternative to any requirement under part 1271, subpart C or D, specifically under § 1271.155(a).

Under §§ 1271.290(c) and 1271.370(b) and (c), the estimated 1,561 non-reproductive HCT/P establishments label each of their 2,066,890 HCT/Ps with certain information. These establishments are also required to inform their consignees in writing of the requirements for tracking and of their established tracking system under § 1271.290(f).

Under § 1271.50(a), HCT/P establishments are required to have a documented medical history interview about the donor's medical history and relevant social behavior as part of the donor's relevant medical records for each of the estimated total of 109,019 donors (which include conventional tissue donors, eye tissue donors, peripheral and cord blood stem cell donors, and reproductive cell and tissue donors), and the estimated total of 103,419 non-reproductive cells and tissue donors (total donors minus reproductive cell and tissue donors).

FDA estimates that under 1271.420(a), 200 establishments will submit 560 reports of HCT/Ps offered for imports. In some cases, the estimated burden may appear to be lower or higher than the burden experienced by individual establishments. The estimated burden in these charts is an estimated average burden, taking into account the range of impact each regulation may have on respondents.

In the Federal Register of September 7, 2016 (81 FR 61685), we published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed extension of this collection of information. One comment was received beyond the scope of the four information collection topics solicited and therefore we have not discussed it in this document.

FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

Total annual disclosuresAverage burden per disclosureTotal hours1271.55(a)1,5511,422.882,206,890.5 (30 minutes)1,103,4451271.60(c) and (d)(2)1,375416572,000.5 (30 minutes)286,0001271.290(c)1,5611,324.082,066,890.083 (5 minutes)171,5521271.290(f)1,56111,56111,5611271.370(b) and (c)1,5611,324.082,066,890.25 (15 minutes)516,723Total2,079,2811 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.Dated: March 28, 2017.Anna K. Abram,Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.[FR Doc. 2017-06398 Filed 3-30-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-PDEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICESFood and Drug Administration[Docket No. FDA-2017-N-0001]Roadmap for Engaging With the Food and Drug Administration's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research; Public WorkshopAGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:

Notice of public workshop.

SUMMARY:

The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), is announcing the following public workshop entitled “Roadmap for Engaging with FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER).” The purpose of this workshop is to help the public learn how to successfully engage with CDER.

DATES:

The public workshop will be held on May 12, 2017, from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.

ADDRESSES:

The public workshop will be held at FDA's White Oak Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31 Conference Center, the Great Room (Rm. 1503), Silver Spring, MD 20903-0002. Entrance for the public workshop participants (non-FDA employees) is through Building 1 where routine security check procedures will be performed. For parking and security information, please refer to https://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WorkingatFDA/BuildingsandFacilities/WhiteOakCampusInformation/ucm241740.htm.

FDA is announcing a public workshop entitled “Roadmap for Engaging with FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER).” This workshop is intended to help the public learn the most effective ways to successfully engage with CDER. There will be presentations on learning about the drug approval process, as well as the opportunity for questions and answers following each presentation.

Registration is free and based on space availability, with priority given to early registrants. Persons interested in attending this public workshop must register by May 5, 2016, 6 p.m. EST. Early registration is recommended because seating is limited; therefore, FDA may limit the number of participants from each organization. If time and space permit, onsite registration on the day of the public workshop will be provided beginning at 8 a.m. We will let registrants know if registration closes before the day of the public workshop.

If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Chris Melton no later than May 1, 2017.

Transcripts: Please be advised that as soon as a transcript of the public workshop is available, it will be assessable at https://www.regulations.gov. It may be viewed at the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. A transcript will also be available in either hardcopy or on CD-ROM, after submission of a Freedom of Information request. The Freedom of Information office address is available on the Agency's Web site at https://www.fda.gov.

Dated: March 27, 2017.Anna K. Abram,Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.[FR Doc. 2017-06370 Filed 3-30-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-PDEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICESIndian Health ServiceNotice To Propose the Re-Designation of the Service Delivery Area for the Tolowa Dee-ni' Nation (Smith River Rancheria)AGENCY:

Indian Health Service, Department of Health and Human Services.

ACTION:

Notice.

SUMMARY:

This notice advises the public that the Indian Health Service (IHS) proposes to expand the geographic boundaries of the Service Delivery Area for the Tolowa Dee-ni' Nation (Tribe) previously known as the Smith River Rancheria of Smith River, California. The Tolowa Dee-ni's Tribal Headquarters is located three miles south of the California-Oregon border in Northern California.

The entire State of California, excluding the counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Los Angeles, Marin, Orange, Sacramento, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Kern, Merced, Monterey, Napa, San Benito, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, Santa Cruz, Solano, Stanislaus, and Ventura, are designated a Purchased/Referred Care (PRC) Service Delivery Area, formerly referred to as a Contract Health Service Delivery Area, by statute. The current Service Delivery Area for the Tolowa Dee-ni' Nation Tribal members is the statutorily established California PRC Service Delivery Area. The expanded PRC Service Delivery Area for the Tolowa Dee-ni' Nation includes the statutorily established California PRC Service Delivery Area and Curry County in the State of Oregon.

DATES:

Comments must be submitted May 1, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

In commenting, please refer to the title of this notice. Because of staff and resource limitations, we cannot accept comments by facsimile (FAX) transmission. You may submit comments in one of four ways (please choose only one of the ways listed):

1. Electronically. You may submit electronic comments on this regulation to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the “Submit a Comment” instructions.

Inspection of Public Comments: All comments received before the close of the comment period are available for viewing by the public, including any personally identifiable or confidential business information that is included in a comment.

Background: The IHS currently provides services under regulations codified at 42 CFR part 136, subparts A through C. Subpart C defines a Contract Health Service Delivery Area, now known as PRC Service Delivery Area, as the geographic area within which PRC will be made available by the IHS to members of an identified Indian community who reside in the Service Delivery Area. Potential eligibility for services alone, or residence in a PRC Service Delivery Area by a person who is within the scope of the Indian health program, as set forth in 42 CFR 136.12, does not create a legal entitlement to PRC. Services needed, but not available at an IHS/Tribal facility, are provided under the PRC program depending on the availability of funds, the person's relative medical priority, and the actual availability and accessibility of alternate resources in accordance with the regulations.

As applicable to the Tribes, these regulations provide that, unless otherwise designated, a PRC Service Delivery Area shall consist of a county which includes all or part of a reservation and any county or counties which have a common boundary with the reservation, 42 CFR 136.22(a)(6) (2016). The regulations also provide that after consultation with the Tribal governing body or bodies on those reservations included within the PRC Service Delivery Area, the Secretary may from time to time, re-designate areas within the United States for inclusion in or exclusion from a PRC Service Delivery Area. The regulations require that certain criteria must be considered before any re-designation is made. The criteria are as follows:

(1) The number of Indians residing in the area proposed to be so included or excluded;

(2) Whether the Tribal governing body has determined that Indians residing in the area near the reservation are socially and economically affiliated with the Tribes;

(3) The geographic proximity to the reservation of the area whose inclusion or exclusion is being considered; and

(4) The level of funding which would be available for the provision of PRC.

Additionally, the regulations require that any re-designation of a PRC Service Delivery Area must be made in accordance with the Administrative Procedures Act (5 U.S.C. 553). In compliance with this requirement, we are publishing this proposal and requesting public comments.

Congress designated the entire state of California as a PRC Service Delivery Area, excluding certain counties, under section 810 of the Indian Healthcare Improvement Act, Public Law 94-437, as amended (25 U.S.C. 1680). IHS has utilized the congressionally established PRC Service Delivery Area for the purposes of administering PRC benefits to members of the Tribe. Thus, members of the Tribe who reside outside of the statutorily established California PRC Service Delivery Area do not reside within the Tolowa Dee-ni's current PRC Service Delivery Area and are currently not eligible for PRC services.

IHS has historically established PRC Service Delivery Areas in accordance with Congressional intent but has preserved regulatory flexibility to re-designate areas as appropriate for inclusion in or exclusion from PRC service delivery under PRC regulations. One of the criteria for such re-designations is the geographic proximity of the expanded area to the existing reservation or service delivery area. Here, IHS proposes to expand the Tribe's PRC Service Delivery Area beyond the geographic description in 25 U.S.C. 1680 to include a county adjacent to the Tribe's existing PRC Service Delivery Area, in a neighboring state. There are already PRC Service Delivery Areas that include part of the state of California and part of another state, for example, Cocopah Tribe of Arizona, (Yuma, Arizona, and Imperial, California); Colorado River Indian Tribes of the Colorado River Indian Reservation, Arizona and California, (La Paz, Arizona; Riverside, California; San Bernardino, California; and Yuma, Arizona); Fort Mojave Indian Tribe of Arizona, California and Nevada, (Nevada; Mohave, Arizona; San Bernardino, California); and the Quechan Tribe of Fort Yuma Indian Reservation, California and Arizona, (Yuma, Arizona; and Imperial, California).

The Tolowa Dee-ni' Nation has a significant number of members who are not residents of California. According to the Tribe's estimates, 177 enrolled Tolowa Dee-ni' members are non-residents who remain actively involved with the Tribe, and reside in Curry County in the State of Oregon and are not currently eligible for PRC care.

Under 42 CFR 136.23, those otherwise eligible Indians who do not reside on a reservation, but reside within a PRC Service Delivery Area must be either members of the Tribe or other IHS beneficiaries who maintain close economic and social ties with the Tribe. In this case, in applying the aforementioned PRC Service Delivery Area re-designation criteria required by operative regulations codified at 42 CFR part 136, subpart C, the following findings are made:

1. By expanding, the Tribe estimates the current eligible population will be increased by 177.

2. The Tribe has determined that these 177 individuals are members of the Tribe and they are socially and economically affiliated with the Tribe.

3. The expanded area including Curry County in the State of Oregon maintains a common boundary with the State of California and the statutorily created California PRC Service Delivery Area.

4. Generally, the Tribal members located in Curry County in the State of Oregon currently do not use the Indian health system for their PRC health care needs. The Tribe will use its existing Federal allocation for PRC funds to provide services to the expanded population. No additional financial resources will be allocated by IHS to the Tribe to provide services to Tribal members residing in Curry County in the State of Oregon.

Purchased/Referred Care Service Delivery AreasTribe/reservationCounty/stateAk Chin Indian CommunityPinal, AZ.Alabama-Coushatta Tribes of TexasPolk, TX.1AlaskaEntire State.2Arapahoe Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, WyomingHot Springs, WY, Fremont, WY, Sublette, WY.Aroostook Band of MicmacsAroostook, ME.3Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, MontanaDaniels, MT, McCone, MT, Richland, MT, Roosevelt, MT, Sheridan, MT, Valley, MT.Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians of the Bad River Reservation, WisconsinAshland, WI, Iron, WI.Bay Mills Indian Community, MichiganChippewa, MI.Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation of MontanaGlacier, MT, Pondera, MT.Brigham City Intermountain School Health Center, Utah(4)Burns Paiute TribeHarney, OR.CaliforniaEntire State, except for the counties listed in the footnote.5Catawba Indian NationAll Counties in SC,6 Cabarrus, NC, Cleveland, NC, Gaston, NC, Mecklenburg, NC, Rutherford, NC, Union, NC.Cayuga NationAlleghany, NY,7 Cattaraugus, NY, Chautauqua, NY, Erie, NY, Warren, PA.Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe of the Cheyenne River Reservation, South DakotaCorson, SD, Dewey, SD, Haakon, SD, Meade, SD, Perkins, SD, Potter, SD, Stanley, SD, Sully, SD, Walworth, SD, Ziebach, SD.Chippewa-Cree Indians of the Rocky Boy's Reservation, MontanaChouteau, MT, Hill, MT, Liberty, MT.Chitimacha Tribe of LouisianaSt. Mary Parish, LA.Cocopah Tribe of ArizonaYuma, AZ, Imperial, CA.Coeur D'Alene TribeBenewah, ID, Kootenai, ID, Latah, ID, Spokane, WA, Whitman, WA.Colorado River Indian Tribes of the Colorado River Indian Reservation, Arizona and CaliforniaLa Paz, AZ, Riverside, CA, San Bernardino, CA, Yuma, AZ.Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead ReservationFlathead, MT, Lake, MT, Missoula, MT, Sanders, MT.Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama NationKlickitat, WA, Lewis, WA, Skamania, WA,8 Yakima, WA.Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians of OregonBenton, OR,9 Clackamas, OR, Lane, OR, Lincoln, OR, Linn, OR, Marion, OR, Multnomah, OR, Polk, OR, Tillamook, OR, Washington, OR, Yam Hill, OR.Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis ReservationGrays Harbor, WA, Lewis, WA, Thurston, WA.Confederated Tribes of the Colville ReservationChelan, WA,10 Douglas, WA, Ferry, WA, Grant, WA, Lincoln, WA, Okanogan, WA, Stevens, WA.Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw IndiansCoos, OR,11 Curry, OR, Douglas, OR, Lane, OR, Lincoln, OR.Confederated Tribes of the Goshute Reservation, Nevada and UtahNevada, Juab, UT, Toole, UT.Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of OregonMarion, OR, Multnomah, OR, Polk, OR,12 Tillamook, OR, Washington, OR, Yam Hill, OR.Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian ReservationUmatilla, OR, Union, OR.Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of OregonClackamas, OR, Jefferson, OR, Linn, OR, Marion, OR, Wasco, OR.Coquille Indian TribeCoos, OR, Curry, OR, Douglas, OR, Jackson, OR, Lane, OR.Coushatta Tribe of LouisianaAllen Parish, LA, Elton, LA.13Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of IndiansCoos, OR,14 Deshutes, OR, Douglas, OR, Jackson, OR, Josephine, OR, Klamath, OR, Lane, OR.Cowlitz Indian TribeColumbia, OR,15 Clark, WA, Cowlitz, WA, King, WA, Lewis, WA, Peirce, WA, Skamania, WA, Thurston, WA, Kittitas, WA, Wahkiakum, WA.Crow Creek Sioux Tribe of the Crow Creek Reservation, South DakotaBrule, SD, Buffalo, SD, Hand, SD, Hughes, SD, Hyde, SD, Lyman, SD, Stanley, SD.Crow Tribe of MontanaBig Horn, MT, Carbon, MT, Treasure, MT,16 Yellowstone, MT, Big Horn, WY, Sheridan, WY.Eastern Band of Cherokee IndiansCherokee, NC, Graham, NC, Haywood, NC, Jackson, NC, Swain, NC.Eastern Shoshone Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, WyomingFremont, WY, Hot Springs, WY, Sublette, WY.Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe of South DakotaMoody, SD.Forest County Potawatomi Community, WisconsinForest, WI, Marinette, WI, Oconto, WI.Fort Belknap Indian Community of the Fort Belknap Reservation of MontanaBlaine, MT, Phillips, MT.Fort McDermitt Paiute and Shoshone Tribes of the Fort McDermitt Indian Reservation, Nevada and OregonNevada, Malheur, OR.For McDowell Yavapai Nation, ArizonaMaricopa, AZ.Fort Mojave Indian Tribe of Arizona, California and NevadaNevada, Mohave, AZ, San Bernardino, CA.Gila River Indian Community of the Gila River Indian Reservation, ArizonaMaricopa, AZ, Pinal, AZ.Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, MichiganAntrim, MI,17 Benzie, MI, Charlevoix, MI, Grand Traverse, MI, Leelanau, MI, Manistee, MI.Hannahville Indian Community, MichiganDelta, MI, Menominee, MI.Haskell Indian Health CenterDouglas, KS.18Havasupai Tribe of the Havasupai Reservation, ArizonaCoconino, AZ.Ho-Chunk Nation of WisconsinAdams, WI,19 Clark, WI, Columbia, WI, Crawford, WI, Dane, WI, Eau Clarrie, WI, Houston, MN, Jackson, WI, Juneau, WI, La Crosse, WI, Marathon, WI, Monroe, WI, Sauk, WI, Shawano, WI, Vernon, WI, Wood, WI.Hoh Indian TribeJefferson, WA.Hopi Tribe of ArizonaApache, AZ, Coconino, AZ, Navajo, AZ.Houlton Band of Maliseet IndiansAroostook, ME.20Hualapai Indian Tribe of the Hualapai Indian Reservation, ArizonaCoconino, AZ, Mohave, AZ, Yavapai, AZ.Iowa Tribe of Kansas and NebraskaBrown, KS, Doniphan, KS, Richardson, NE.Jamestown S'Klallam TribeClallam, WA, Jefferson, WA.Jena Band of Choctaw IndiansGrand Parish, LA,21 LaSalle Parish, LA, Rapides, LA.Jicarilla Apache Nation, New MexicoArchuleta, CO, Rio Arriba, NM, Sandoval, NM.Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians of the Kaibab Indian Reservation, ArizonaCoconino, AZ, Mohave, AZ, Kane, UT.Kalispel Indian Community of the Kalispel ReservationPend Oreille, WA, Spokane, WA.Kewa Pueblo, New MexicoSandoval, NM, Santa Fe, NM.Keweenaw Bay Indian Community, MichiganBaraga, MI, Houghton, MI, Ontonagon, MI.Kickapoo Traditional Tribe of TexasMaverick, TX.22Kickapoo Tribe of Indians of the Kickapoo Reservation in KansasBrown, KS, Jackson, KS.Klamath TribesKlamath, OR.23Koi Nation of Northern California (formerly known as Lower Lake Rancheria, California)Lake, CA, Sonoma, CA.24Kootenai Tribe of IdahoBoundary, ID.Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Superior Chippewa Indians of WisconsinSawyer, WI.Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of the Lac du Flambeau Reservation WisconsinIron, WI, Oneida, WI, Vilas, WI.Lac Vieux Desert Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of MichiganGogebic, MI.Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, MichiganKent, MI,25 Lake, MI, Manistee, MI, Mason, MI Muskegon, MI, Newaygo, MI, Oceana, MI, Ottawa, MI, Wexford, MI.Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians, MichiganAlcona, MI,26 Alger, MI, Alpena, MI, Antrim, MI, Benzie, MI, Charlevoix, MI, Cheboygan, MI, Chippewa, MI, Crawford, MI, Delta, MI, Emmet, MI, Grand Traverse, MI, Iosco, MI, Kalkaska, MI, Leelanau, MI, Luce, MI, Mackinac, MI, Manistee, MI, Missaukee, MI, Montmorency, MI, Ogemaw, MI, Oscoda, MI, Otsego, MI, Presque Isle, MI, Schoolcraft, MI, Roscommon, MI, Wexford, MI.Lower Brule Sioux Tribe of the Lower Brule Reservation, South DakotaBrule, SD, Buffalo, SD, Hughes, SD, Lyman, SD, Stanley, SD.Lower Elwha Tribal CommunityClallam, WA.Lower Sioux Indian Community in the State of MinnesotaRedwood, MN, Renville, MN.Lummi Tribe of the Lummi ReservationWhatcom, WA.Makah Indian Tribe of the Makah Indian ReservationClallam, WA.Mashantucket Pequot Indian TribeNew London, CT.27Mashpee Wampanoag TribeBarnstable, MA, Bristol, MA, Norfolk, MA, Plymouth, MA, Suffolk, MA.28Match-e-be-nash-she-wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians of MichiganAllegan, MI,29 Barry, MI, Kalamazoo, MI, Kent, MI, Ottawa, MI.Menominee Indian Tribe of WisconsinLanglade, WI, Menominee, WI, Oconto, WI, Shawano, WI.Mescalero Apache Tribe of the Mescalero Reservation, New MexicoChaves, NM, Lincoln, NM, Otero, NM.Miccosukee Tribe of IndiansBroward, FL, Collier, FL, Miami-Dade, FL, Hendry, FL.Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, Minnesota, Bois Forte Band (Nett Lake)Itasca, MN, Koochiching, MN, St. Louis, MN.Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, Minnesota, Fond du Lac BandCarlton, MN, St. Louis, MN.Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, Minnesota, Grand Portage BandCook, MN.Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, Minnesota, Leech Lake BandBeltrami, MN, Cass, MN, Hubbard, MN, Itasca, MN.Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, Minnesota Mille Lacs BandAitkin, MN, Kanebec, MN, Mille Lacs, MN, Pine, MN.Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, Minnesota White Earth BandBecker, MN, Clearwater, MN, Mahnomen, MN, Norman, MN, Polk, MN.Mississippi Band of Choctaw IndiansAttala, MS, Jasper, MS,30 Jones, MS, Kemper, MS, Leake, MS, Neshoba, MS, Newton, MS, Noxubee, MS,31 Scott, MS,32 Winston, MS.Mohegan Tribe of Indians of ConnecticutFairfield, CT, Hartford, CT, Litchfield, CT, Middlesex, CT, New Haven, CT, New London, CT, Tolland, CT, Windham, CT.Muckleshoot Indian TribeKing, WA, Pierce, WA.Narragansett Indian TribeWashington, RI.33Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico, & UtahApache, AZ, Bernalillo, NM, Cibola, NM, Coconino, AZ, Kane, UT, McKinley, NM, Montezuma, CO, Navajo, AZ, Rio Arriba, NM, Sandoval, NM, San Juan, NM, San Juan, UT, Socorro, NM, Valencia, NM.NevadaEntire State.34Nez Perce TribeClearwater, ID, Idaho, ID, Latah, ID, Lewis, ID, Nez Perce, ID.Nisqually Indian TribePierce, WA, Thurston, WA.Nooksack Indian TribeWhatcom, WA.Northern Cheyenne Tribe of the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation, MontanaBig Horn, MT, Carter, MT,35 Rosebud, MT.Northwestern Band of Shoshone NationBox Elder, UT.36Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Pottawatomi, MichiganAllegan, MI,37 Barry, MI, Branch, MI, Calhoun, MI, Kalamazoo, MI, Kent, MI, Ottawa, MI.Oglala Sioux TribeBennett, SD, Cherry, NE, Custer, SD, Dawes, NE, Fall River, SD, Jackson, SD,38 Mellete, SD, Pennington, SD, Shannon, SD, Sheridan, NE, Todd, SD.Ohkay Owingeh, New MexicoRio Arriba, NM.OklahomaEntire State.39Omaha Tribe of NebraskaBurt, NE, Cuming, NE, Monona, IA, Thurston, NE, Wayne, NE.Oneida NationBrown, WI, Outagamie, WI.Oneida Nation of New YorkChenango, NY, Cortland, NY, Herkimer, NY, Madison, NY, Oneida, NY, Onondaga, NY.Onondaga NationOnondaga, NY.Paiute Indian Tribe of UtahIron, UT,40 Millard, UT, Sevier, UT, Washington, UT.Pascua Yaqui Tribe of ArizonaPima, AZ.41Passamaquoddy TribeAroostook, ME,4243 Hancock, ME,44 Washington, ME.Penobscot NationAroostook, ME,45 Penobscot, ME.Poarch Band of CreeksBaldwin, AL,46 Elmore, AL, Escambia, AL, Mobile, AL, Monroe, AL, Escambia, FL.Pokagon Band of Pottawatomi Indians, Michigan and IndianaAllegan, MI,47 Berrien, MI, Cass, MI, Elkhart, IN, Kosciusko, IN, La Porte, IN, Marshall, IN, St. Joseph, IN, Starke, IN, Van Buren, MI.Ponca Tribe of NebraskaBoyd, NE,48 Burt, NE, Charles Mix, SD, Douglas, NE, Hall, NE, Holt, NE, Knox, NE, Lancaster, NE, Madison, NE, Platte, NE, Pottawatomie, IA, Sarpy, NE, Stanton, NE, Wayne, NE, Woodbury, IA.Port Gamble S'Klallam TribeKitsap, WA.Prairie Band of Pottawatomi NationJackson, KS.Prairie Island Indian Community in the State of MinnesotaGoodhue, MN.Pueblo of Acoma, New MexicoCibola, NM.Pueblo of Cochiti, New MexicoSandoval, NM, Santa Fe, NM.Pueblo of Isleta, New MexicoBernalillo, NM, Torrance, NM, Valencia, NM.Pueblo of Jemez, New MexicoSandoval, NM.Pueblo of Laguna, New MexicoBernalillo, NM, Cibola, NM, Sandoval, NM, Valencia, NM.Pueblo of Nambe, New MexicoSanta Fe, NM.Pueblo of Picuris, New MexicoTaos, NM.Pueblo of Pojoaque, New MexicoRio Arriba, NM, Santa Fe, NM.Pueblo of San Felipe, New MexicoSandoval, NM.Pueblo of San Ildefonso, New MexicoLos Alamos, NM, Rio Arriba, NM, Sandoval, NM, Santa Fe, NM.Pueblo of Sandia, New MexicoBernalillo, NM, Sandoval, NM.Pueblo of Santa Ana, New MexicoSandoval, NM.Pueblo of Santa Clara, New MexicoLos Alamos, NM, Sandoval, NM, Santa Fe, NM.Pueblo of Taos, New MexicoColfax, NM, Taos, NM.Pueblo of Tesuque, MexicoSana Fe, NM.Pueblo of Zia, New MexicoSandoval, NM.Puyallup Tribe of the Puyallup ReservationKing, WA, Pierce, WA, Thurston, WA.Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Indian Reservation, Arizona and CaliforniaYuma, AZ, Imperial, CA.Quileute Tribe of the Quileute ReservationClallam, WA, Jefferson, WA.Quinault Indian NationGrays Harbor, WA, Jefferson, WA.Rapid City, South DakotaPennington, SD.49Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of WisconsinBayfield, WI.Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians, MinnesotaBeltrami, MN, Clearwater, MN, Koochiching, MN, Lake of the Woods, MN, Marshall, MN, Pennington, MN, Polk, MN, Roseau, MN.Rosebud Sioux Tribe of the Rosebud Indian Reservation, South DakotaBennett, SD, Cherry, NE, Gregory, SD, Lyman, SD, Mellette, SD, Todd, SD, Tripp, SD.Sac & Fox Nation of Missouri in Kansas and NebraskaBrown, KS, Richardson, NE.Sac & Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in IowaTama, IA.Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of MichiganArenac, MI,50 Clare, MI, Isabella, MI, Midland, MI, Missaukee, MI.Saint Regis Mohawk TribeFranklin, NY, St. Lawrence, NY.Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community of the Salt River Reservation, ArizonaMaricopa, AZ.Samish Indian NationClallam, WA,51 Island, WA, Jefferson, WA, King, WA, Kitsap, WA, Pierce, WA, San Juan, WA, Skagit, WA, Snohomish, WA, Whatcom, WA.San Carlos Apache Tribe of the San Carlos Reservation, ArizonaApache, AZ, Cochise, AZ, Gila, AZ, Graham, AZ, Greenlee, AZ, Pinal, AZ.San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe of ArizonaCoconino, AZ, San Juan, UT.Santee Sioux Nation, NebraskaBon Homme, SD, Knox, NE.Sauk-Suiattle Indian TribeSnohomish, WA, Skagit, WA.Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, MichiganAlger, MI,52 Chippewa, MI, Delta, MI, Luce, MI, Mackinac, MI, Marquette, MI, Schoolcraft, MI.Seminole Tribe of FloridaBroward, FL, Collier, FL, Miami-Dade, FL, Glades, FL, Hendry, FL.Seneca Nation of IndiansAlleghany, NY, Cattaraugus, NY, Chautauqua, NY, Erie, NY, Warren, PA.Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community of MinnesotaScott, MN.Shinnecock Indian NationNassau, NY,53 Suffolk, NY.Shoalwater Bay Tribe of the Shoalwater Bay Indian ReservationPacific, WA.Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of the Fort Hall ReservationBannock, ID, Bingham, ID, Caribou, ID, Lemhi, ID,54 Power, ID.Shoshone-Paiute Tribes of the Duck Valley Reservation, NevadaNevada, Owyhee, ID.Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate of the Lake Traverse Reservation, South DakotaCodington, SD, Day, SD, Grant, SD, Marshall, SD, Richland, ND, Roberts, SD, Sargent, ND, Traverse, MN.Skokomish Indian TribeMason, WA.Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians of UtahTooele, UT.Snoqualmie Indian TribeIsland, WA, King, WA,55 Mason, WA, Pierce, WA, Snohomish, WA.Sokaogon Chippewa Community, WisconsinForest, WI.Southern Ute Indian Tribe of the Southern Ute Reservation, ColoradoArchuleta, CO, La Plata, CO, Montezuma, CO, Rio Arriba, NM, San Juan, NM.Spirit Lake Tribe, North DakotaBenson, ND, Eddy, ND, Nelson, ND, Ramsey, ND.Spokane Tribe of the Spokane ReservationFerry, WA, Lincoln, WA, Stevens, WA.Squaxin Island Tribe of the Squaxin Island ReservationMason, WA.St. Croix Chippewa Indians of WisconsinBarron, WI, Burnett, WI, Pine, MN, Polk, WI, Washburn, WI.Standing Rock Sioux Tribe of North & South DakotaAdams, ND, Campbell, SD, Corson, SD, Dewey, SD, Emmons, ND, Grant, ND, Morton, ND, Perkins, SD, Sioux, ND, Walworth, SD, Ziebach, SD.Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians of WashingtonSnohomish, WA.Stockbridge Munsee Community, WisconsinMenominee, WI, Shawano, WI.Suquamish Indian Tribe of the Port Madison ReservationKitsap, WA.Swinomish Indian Tribal CommunitySkagit, WA.Tejon Indian TribeKern, CA.56Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation, North DakotaDunn, ND, Mercer, ND, McKenzie, ND, McLean, ND, Mountrail, ND, Ward, ND.Tohono O'odham Nation of ArizonaMaricopa, AZ, Pima, AZ, Pinal, AZ.Tolowa Dee-ni' Nation (Smith River Rancheria)Del Norte, CA, Curry, OR.57Tonawanda Band of SenecaGenesee, NY, Erie, NY, Niagara, NY.Tonto Apache Tribe of ArizonaGila, AZ.Trenton Service Unit, North Dakota and MontanaDivide, ND,58 McKenzie, ND, Williams, ND, Richland, MT, Roosevelt, MT, Sheridan, MT.Tulalip Tribes of WashingtonSnohomish, WA.Tunica-Biloxi Indian TribeAvoyelles, LA, Rapides, LA.59Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians of North DakotaRolette, ND.Tuscarora NationNiagara, NY.Upper Sioux Community, MinnesotaChippewa, MN, Yellow Medicine, MN.Upper Skagit Indian TribeSkagit, WA.Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah & Ouray Reservation, UtahCarbon, UT, Daggett, UT, Duchesne, UT, Emery, UT, Grand, UT, Rio Blanco, CO, Summit, UT, Uintah, UT, Utah, UT, Wasatch, UT.Ute Mountain Ute TribeApache, AZ, La Plata, CO, Montezuma, CO, San Juan, NM, San Juan, UT.Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah)Dukes, MA,60 Barnstable, MA, Bristol, MA, Norfolk, MA, Plymouth, MA, Suffolk, MA.61Washoe Tribe of Nevada & CaliforniaNevada, California except for the counties listed in footnote.White Mountain Apache Tribe of the Fort Apache Reservation, ArizonaApache, AZ, Coconino, AZ, Gila, AZ, Graham, AZ, Greenlee, AZ, Navajo, AZ.Wilton Rancheria, CaliforniaSacramento, CA.62Winnebago Tribe of NebraskaDakota, NE, Dixon, NE, Monona, IA, Thurston, NE, Wayne, NE, Woodbury, IA.Yankton Sioux Tribe of South DakotaBon Homme, SD, Boyd, NE, Charles Mix, SD, Douglas, SD, Gregory, SD, Hutchinson, SD, Knox, NE.Yavapai-Apache Nation of the Camp Verde Indian Reservation, ArizonaYavapai, AZ.Yavapai-Prescott Indian TribeYavapai, AZ.Ysleta Del Sur Pueblo of TexasEl Paso, TX.63Zuni Tribe of the Zuni Reservation, New MexicoApache, AZ, Cibola, NM, McKinley, NM, Valencia, NM1 Public Law 100-89, Restoration Act for Ysleta Del Sur and Alabama and Coushatta Tribes of Texas establishes service areas for “members of the Tribe” by sections 101(3) and 105(a) for the Pueblo and sections 201(3) and 206(a) respectively.2 Entire State of Alaska is included as a CHSDA by regulation (42 CFR 136.22(a)(1)).3 Aroostook Band of Micmacs was recognized by Congress on November 26, 1991, through the Aroostook Band of Micmac Settlement Act. Aroostook County, ME, was defined as the SDA.4 Special programs have been established by Congress irrespective of the eligibility regulations. Eligibility for services at these facilities is based on the legislative history of the appropriation of funds for the particular facility rather than the eligibility regulations. Historically services have been provided at Brigham City Intermountain School Health Center, Utah (Pub. L. 88-358).5 Entire State of California, excluding the counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Los Angeles, Marin, Orange, Sacramento, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Kern, Merced, Monterey, Napa, San Benito, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, Santa Cruz, Solano, Stanislaus, and Ventura, is designated a CHSDA (25 U.S.C. 1680).6 The counties were recognized after the January 1984 CHSDA FRN was published, in accordance with Public Law 103-116, Catawba Indian Tribe of South Carolina Land Claims Settlement Act of 1993, dated October 27, 1993.7 There is no reservation for the Cayuga Nation; the service delivery area consists of those counties identified by the Cayuga Nation.8 Skamania County, WA, has historically been a part of the Yakama Service Unit population since 1979.9 In order to carry out the Congressional intent of the Siletz Restoration Act, Public Law 95-195, as expressed in H. Report No. 95-623, at page 4, members of the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians of Oregon residing in these counties are eligible for contract health services.10 Chelan County, WA, has historically been a part of the Colville Service Unit population since 1970.11 Pursuant to Public Law 98-481 (H. Rept. No. 98-904), Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Restoration Act, members of the Tribe residing in these counties were specified as eligible for Federal services and benefits without regard to the existence of a Federal Indian reservation.12 The Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Community of Oregon were recognized by Public Law 98-165 which was signed into law on November 22, 1983, and provides for eligibility in these six counties without regard to the existence of a reservation.13 The CHSDA for the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana was expanded administratively by the Director, IHS, through regulation (42 CFR 136.22(6)) to include city limits of Elton, LA.14 Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians recognized by Public Law 97-391, signed into law on December 29, 1983. House Rept. No. 97-862 designates Douglas, Jackson, and Josephine Counties as a service area without regard to the existence of a reservation. The IHS later administratively expanded the CHSDA to include the counties of Coos, OR, Deshutes, OR, Klamath, OR, and Lane, OR.15 The Cowlitz Indian Tribe was recognized in July 2002 as documented at 67 FR 46329, July 12, 2002. The counties listed were designated administratively as the SDA, to function as a CHSDA, for the purposes of operating a CHS program pursuant to the ISDEAA, Public Law 93-638. The CHSDA was administratively expanded to included Columbia County, OR, Kittitas, WA, and Wahkiakum County, WA, as published at 67884 FR December 21, 2009.16 Treasure County, MT, has historically been a part of the Crow Service Unit population.17 The counties listed have historically been a part of the Grand Traverse Service Unit population since 1980.18 Haskell Indian Health Center has historically been a part of Kansas Service Unit since 1979. Special programs have been established by Congress irrespective of the eligibility regulations. Eligibility for services at these facilities is based on the legislative history of the appropriation of funds for the particular facility rather than the eligibility regulations. Historically services have been provided at Haskell Indian Health Center (H. Rept. No. 95-392).19 CHSDA counties for the Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin were designated by regulation (42 CFR 136.22(a)(5)). Dane County, WI, was added to the reservation by the Bureau of Indian Affairs in 1986.20 Public Law 97-428 provides that any member of the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians in or around the Town of Houlton shall be eligible without regard to existence of a reservation.21 The Jena Band of Choctaw Indian was Federally acknowledged as documented at 60 FR 28480, May 31, 1995. The counties listed were designated administratively as the SDA, to function as a CHSDA, for the purposes of operating a CHS program pursuant to the ISDEAA, Public Law 93-638.22 Kickapoo Traditional Tribe of Texas, formerly known as the Texas Band of Kickapoo, was recognized by Public Law 97-429, signed into law on January 8, 1983. The Act provides for eligibility for Kickapoo Tribal members residing in Maverick County without regard to the existence of a reservation.23 The Klamath Indian Tribe Restoration Act (Pub. L. 99-398, Sec. 2(2)) states that for the purpose of Federal services and benefits “members of the tribe residing in Klamath County shall be deemed to be residing in or near a reservation”.24 The Koi Nation of Northern California, formerly known as the Lower Lake Rancheria, was reaffirmed by the Secretary of the Bureau of Indian Affairs on December 29, 2000. The counties listed were designated administratively as the SDA, to function as a PRC SDA, for the purposes of operating a PRC program pursuant to the ISDEAA, Public Law 93-638.25 The Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians and the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians Act recognized the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians and the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians. Pursuant to Public Law 103-324, Sec.4 (b) the counties listed were designated administratively as the SDA, to function as a CHSDA, for the purposes of operating a CHS program pursuant to the ISDEAA, Public Law 93-638.26 The Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians and the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians Act recognized the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians and the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians. Pursuant to Public Law 103-324, Sec.4 (b) the counties listed were designated administratively as the SDA, to function as a CHSDA, for the purposes of operating a CHS program pursuant to the ISDEAA, Public Law 93-638.27 Mashantucket Pequot Indian Claims Settlement Act, Public Law 98-134, signed into law on October 18, 1983, provides a reservation for the Mashantucket Pequot Indian Tribe in New London County, CT.28 The Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe was recognized in February 2007, as documented at 72 FR 8007, February 22, 2007. The counties listed were designated administratively as the SDA, to function as a CHSDA, for the purposes of operating a CHS program pursuant to the ISDEAA, Public Law 93-638.29 The Match-e-be-nash-she-wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians of Michigan was recognized in October 1998, as documented at 63 FR 56936, October 23, 1998. The counties listed were designated administratively as the SDA, to function as a CHSDA, for the purposes of operating a CHS program pursuant to the ISDEAA, Public Law 93-638.30 Members of the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians residing in Jasper and Noxubee Counties, MS, are eligible for contract health services; these two counties were inadvertently omitted from 42 CFR 136.22.31 Members of the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians residing in Jasper and Noxubee Counties, MS, are eligible for contract health services; these two counties were inadvertently omitted from 42 CFR 136.22.32 Scott County, MS, has historically been a part of the Choctaw Service Unit population since 1970.33 The Narragansett Indian Tribe was recognized by Public Law 95-395, signed into law September 30, 1978. Lands in Washington County, RI, are now Federally restricted and the Bureau of Indian Affairs considers them as the Narragansett Indian Reservation.34 Entire State of Nevada is included as a CHSDA by regulation (42 CFR 136.22 (a)(2))35 Carter County, MT, has historically been a part of the Northern Cheyenne Service Unit population since 1979.36 Land of Box Elder County, Utah, was taken into trust for the Northwestern Band of Shoshoni Nation in 1986.37 The Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Potawatomi, Michigan, formerly known as the Huron Band of Potawatomi, Inc., was recognized in December 1995, as documented at 60 FR 66315, December 21, 1995. The counties listed were designated administratively as the SDA, to function as a CHSDA, for the purposes of operating a CHS program pursuant to the ISDEAA, Public Law 93-638.38 Washabaugh County, SD, merged and became part of Jackson County, SD, in 1983; both were/are CHSDA counties for the Oglala Sioux Tribe.39 Entire State of Oklahoma is included as a CHSDA by regulation (42 CFR 136.22 (a)(3)).40 Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah Restoration Act, Public Law 96-227, provides for the extension of services for the Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah to these four counties without regard to the existence of a reservation.41 Legislative history (H.R. Report No. 95-1021) to Public Law 95-375, Extension of Federal Benefits to Pascua Yaqui Indians, Arizona, expresses congressional intent that lands conveyed to the Pascua Yaqui Tribe of Arizona pursuant to Act of October 8, 1964. (Pub. L. 88-350) shall be deemed a Federal Indian Reservation.42 The Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-420; H. Rept. 96-1353) includes the intent of Congress to fund and provide contract health services to the Passamaquoddy Tribe and the Penobscot Nation.43 The Passamaquoddy Tribe has two reservations: Indian Township and Pleasant Point. The PRC SDA for the Passamaquoddy Tribe at Indian Township, ME, is Aroostook County, ME, Washington County, ME, and Hancock County, ME. The PRC SDA for the Passamaquoddy Tribe at Pleasant Point, ME, is Washington County, ME, south of State Route 9, and Aroostook County, ME.44 The Passamaquoddy Tribe's counties listed are designated administratively as the SDA, to function as a PRC SDA, for the purposes of operating a PRC program pursuant to the ISDEAA, Public Law 93-638.45 The Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-420; H. Rept. 96-1353) includes the intent of Congress to fund and provide PRC to the Passamaquoddy Tribe and the Penobscot Nation.46 Counties in the Service Unit designated by Congress for the Poarch Band of Creek Indians (see H. Rept. 98-886, June 29, 1984; Cong. Record, October 10, 1984, Pg. H11929).47 Public Law 103-323 restored Federal recognition to the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians, Michigan and Indiana, in 1994 and identified counties to serve as the SDA.48 The Ponca Restoration Act, Public Law 101-484, recognized members of the Ponca Tribe of Nebraska in Boyd, Douglas, Knox, Madison or Lancaster counties of Nebraska or Charles Mix county of South Dakota as residing on or near a reservation. Public Law 104-109 made technical corrections to laws relating to Native Americans and added Burt, Hall, Holt, Platte, Sarpy, Stanton, and Wayne counties of Nebraska and Pottawatomie and Woodbury counties of Iowa to the Ponca Tribe of Nebraska SDA.49 Special programs have been established by Congress irrespective of the eligibility regulations. Eligibility for services at these facilities is based on the legislative history of the appropriation of funds for the particular facility, rather than the eligibility regulations. Historically services have been provided at Rapid City (S. Rept. No. 1154, FY 1967 Interior Approp. 89th Cong. 2d Sess.).50 Historically part of Isabella Reservation Area for the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of Michigan and the Eastern Michigan Service Unit population since 1979.51 The Samish Indian Tribe Nation was Federally acknowledged in April 1996 as documented at 61 FR 15825, April 9, 1996. The counties listed were designated administratively as the SDA, to function as a CHSDA, for the purposes of operating a CHS program pursuant to the ISDEAA, Public Law 93-638.52 CHSDA counties for the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, Michigan, were designated by regulation (42 CFR 136.22(a)(4)).53 The Shinnecock Indian Nation was Federally acknowledged in June 2010 as documented at 75 FR 34760, June 18, 2010. The counties listed were designated administratively as the SDA, to function as a CHSDA, for the purposes of operating a CHS program pursuant to the ISDEAA, Public Law 93-638.54 Lemhi County, ID, has historically been a part of the Fort Hall Service Unit population since 1979.55 The Snoqualmie Indian Tribe was Federally acknowledged in August 1997 as documented at 62 FR 45864, August 29, 1997. The counties listed were designated administratively as the SDA, to function as a CHSDA, for the purposes of operating a CHS program pursuant to the ISDEAA, Public Law 93-638.56 On December 30, 2011 the Office of Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs reaffirmed the Federal recognition of the Tejon Indian Tribe. The county listed was designated administratively as the SDA, to function as a CHSDA, for the purposes of operating a CHS program pursuant to the ISDEAA, Public Law 93-638.57 The counties listed are designated administratively as the SDA, to function as a PRC SDA, for the purposes of operating a PRC program pursuant to the ISDEAA, Public Law 93-638.58 The Secretary acting through the Service is directed to provide contract health services to Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians that reside in Trenton Service Unit, North Dakota and Montana, in Divide, Mackenzie, and Williams counties in the state of North Dakota and the adjoining counties of Richland, Roosevelt, and Sheridan in the state of Montana (Sec. 815, Pub. L. 94-437).59 Rapides County, LA, has historically been a part of the Tunica Biloxi Service Unit population since 1982.60 According to Public Law 100-95, Sec. 12, members of the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) residing on Martha's Vineyard are deemed to be living on or near an Indian reservation for the purposes of eligibility for Federal services.61 The counties listed are designated administratively as the SDA, to function as a PRC SDA, for the purposes of operating a PRC program pursuant to the ISDEAA, Public Law 93-638.62 The Wilton Rancheria, California had Federal recognition restored in July 2009 as documented at 74 FR 33468, July 13, 2009. Sacramento County, CA, was designated administratively as the SDA, to function as a CHSDA. Sacramento County was not covered when Congress originally established the State of California as a CHSDA excluding certain counties including Sacramento County (25 U.S.C. 1680).63 Public Law 100-89, Restoration Act for Ysleta Del Sur and Alabama and Coushatta Tribes of Texas establishes service areas for “members of the Tribe” by sections 101(3) and 105(a) for the Pueblo and sections 201(3) and 206(a) respectively.Dated: March 7, 2017.Chris Buchanan, RADM,Assistant Surgeon General, USPHS, Acting Director, Indian Health Service.[FR Doc. 2017-06383 Filed 3-30-17; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4160-16-PDEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICESNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed Meeting

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis Panel; Short-term Measurements of Physical Resilience as a Predictor of Healthspan in Mice RFA.

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

Name of Committee: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Initial Review Group; Epidemiology, Prevention and Behavior Research Review Subcommittee.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.271, Alcohol Research Career Development Awards for Scientists and Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Research Service Awards for Research Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; 93.891, Alcohol Research Center Grants; 93.701, ARRA Related Biomedical Research and Research Support Awards., National Institutes of Health, HHS)Dated: March 27, 2017.Melanie J. Pantoja,Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.[FR Doc. 2017-06330 Filed 3-30-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-PDEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICESNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed Meeting

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIAID Clinical Trial Implementation Grant (R01).

The Coast Guard announces that it will impose conditions of entry on vessels arriving from Nauru. Conditions of entry are intended to protect the United States from vessels arriving from countries that have been found to have deficient port anti-terrorism measures in place.

DATES:

The policy announced in this notice will become effective April 14, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For information about this document call or email Juliet Hudson, International Port Security Evaluation Division, United States Coast Guard, telephone 202-372-1173.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

The authority for this notice is 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 46 U.S.C. 70110, and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1(II)(97.f). As delegated, section 70110 authorizes the Coast Guard to impose conditions of entry on vessels arriving in U.S. waters from ports that the Coast Guard has not found to maintain effective anti-terrorism measures.

On February 2, 2016 the Coast Guard did not find that ports in Nauru maintained effective anti-terrorism measures and that Nauru's legal regime, designated authority oversight, access control and cargo control are all deficient.

On March 16, 2016, Nauru was notified of this determination and given recommendations for improving antiterrorism measures and 90 days to respond. To date, we cannot confirm that Nauru has corrected the identified deficiencies.

Accordingly, beginning April 14, 2017, the conditions of entry shown in Table 1 will apply to any vessel that visited a port in Nauru in its last five port calls.

Table 1—Conditions of Entry for Vessels Visiting Ports in NauruNumberEach vessel must:1Implement measures per the vessel's security plan equivalent to Security Level 2 while in a port in Nauru. As defined in the ISPS Code and incorporated herein, “Security Level 2” refers to the “level for which appropriate additional protective security measures shall be maintained for a period of time as a result of heightened risk of a security incident.”2Ensure that each access point to the vessel is guarded and that the guards have total visibility of the exterior (both landside and waterside) of the vessel while the vessel is in ports in Nauru.3Guards may be provided by the vessel's crew; however, additional crewmembers should be placed on the vessel if necessary to ensure that limits on maximum hours of work are not exceeded and/or minimum hours of rest are met, or provided by outside security forces approved by the vessel's master and Company Security Officer. As defined in the ISPS Code and incorporated herein, “Company Security Officer” refers to the “person designated by the Company for ensuring that a ship security assessment is carried out; that a ship security plan is developed, submitted for approval, and thereafter implemented and maintained and for liaison with port facility security officers and the ship security officer.”4Attempt to execute a Declaration of Security while in a port in Nauru.5Log all security actions in the vessel's security records.6Report actions taken to the cognizant Coast Guard Captain of the Port (COTP) prior to arrival into U.S. waters.7In addition, based on the findings of the Coast Guard boarding or examination, the vessel may be required to ensure that each access point to the vessel is guarded by armed, private security guards and that they have total visibility of the exterior (both landside and waterside) of the vessel while in U.S. ports. The number and position of the guards has to be acceptable to the cognizant COTP prior to the vessel's arrival.

The following countries currently do not maintain effective anti-terrorism measures and are therefore subject to conditions of entry: Cambodia, Cameroon, Comoros, Cote d'Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, the Republic of the Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Iran, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Nauru, Nigeria, Sao Tome and Principe, Syria, Timor-Leste, Venezuela, and Yemen. This list is also available in a policy notice available at https://homeport.uscg.mil under the Maritime Security tab; International Port Security Program (ISPS Code); Port Security Advisory link.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION:

60-Day notice.

SUMMARY:

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration (USCIS) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment upon this proposed revision of a currently approved collection of information. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the information collection notice is published in the Federal Register to obtain comments regarding the nature of the information collection, the categories of respondents, the estimated burden (i.e. the time, effort, and resources used by the respondents to respond), the estimated cost to the respondent, and the actual information collection instruments.

DATES:

Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until May 30, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

All submissions received must include the OMB Control Number 1615-0023 in the body of the letter, the agency name and Docket ID USCIS-2009-0020. To avoid duplicate submissions, please use only one of the following methods to submit comments:

USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Regulatory Coordination Division, Samantha Deshommes, Chief, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20529-2140, telephone number 202-272-8377 (This is not a toll-free number. Comments are not accepted via telephone message). Please note contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. It is not for individual case status inquiries. Applicants seeking information about the status of their individual cases can check Case Status Online, available at the USCIS Web site at http://www.uscis.gov, or call the USCIS National Customer Service Center at 800-375-5283 (TTY 800-767-1833).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments

You may access the information collection instrument with instructions, or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at: http://www.regulations.gov and enter USCIS-2009-0020 in the search box. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material, all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this information makes it public. You may wish to consider limiting the amount of personal information that you provide in any voluntary submission you make to DHS. DHS may withhold information provided in comments from public viewing that it determines may impact the privacy of an individual or is offensive. For additional information, please read the Privacy Act notice that is available via the link in the footer of http://www.regulations.gov.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:

(1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Overview of This Information Collection

(1) Type of Information Collection: Revision of a Currently Approved Collection.

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: Application To Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, Adjustment of Status Under Section 245(i), and Confirmation of Bona Fide Job Offer or Request for Job Portability Under INA Section 204(j).

(3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the DHS sponsoring the collection: Form I-485, Supplement A, and Supplement J to Form I-485; USCIS.

(4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

Primary: Individuals or households. The information collected is used to determine eligibility to adjust status under section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond:

Form I-485—652,599 respondents responding at an estimated 6 hours 15 minutes per response.

Form I-485 Supplement A—36,000 respondents responding at an estimated 1 hour and 15 minutes per response.

Form I-485Supplement J—28,309 respondents responding at an estimated 1 hour per response.

There are 522,089 respondents requiring Biometric Processing at an estimated 1 hour and 10 minutes per response.

(6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total estimated annual hour burden associated with this collection is 4,762,897 hours.

(7) An estimate of the total public burden (in cost) associated with the collection: The estimated total annual cost burden associated with this collection of information is $233,841,457.

We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, have prepared a final environmental impact report (EIR)/environmental impact statement (EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1967, as amended, and its implementing regulations. The EIR portion of the joint document was prepared by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This notice also announces receipt of a final natural community conservation plan/habitat conservation plan (HCP) from the applicant, OTCA.

DATES:

Submitting Comments: To ensure consideration, we must receive written comments by 5 p.m. on May 1, 2017.

Information and comments related specifically to the final EIR and the California Environmental Quality Act should be submitted to Mr. Dan Phu, Orange County Transportation Authority (Attn: M2 NCCP/HCP), 550 South Main Street, P.O. Box 14184, Orange, CA 92863-1584.

Reviewing Documents: Documents available for public review include the final EIR/EIS, final NCCP/HCP, the final Implementing Agreement, and our response to public comments we received on the draft EIR/EIS and NCCP/HCP.

For copies of the documents, please contact the Service by telephone at (760) 431-9440, or by letter to the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Copies of the final EIR/EIS, M2 NCCP/HCP, and Implementing Agreement also are available for public review, by appointment, during regular business hours, at the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office or at the OCTA Office (550 S. Main Street, Orange, CA 92868). Copies are also available for viewing in select Orange County public libraries (listed below) and at the OCTA's Web site, at http://www.octa.net/.

Ms. Karen A. Goebel, Assistant Field Supervisor, at the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES) or at (760) 431-9440 (telephone). If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf, please call the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This notice advises the public that we have prepared a final environmental impact report (EIR)/environmental impact statement (EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1967, as amended, and its implementing regulations. The EIR portion of the joint document was prepared by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This notice also announces receipt of a final natural community conservation plan/habitat conservation plan (HCP).

Background

Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and Federal regulations prohibit the “take” of fish and wildlife species federally listed as endangered or threatened. Take of federally listed fish or wildlife is defined under the Act as to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect listed species, or attempt to engage in such conduct (16 U.S.C. 1538). “Harm” includes significant habitat modification or degradation that actually kills or injures listed wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, and sheltering (50 CFR 17.3(c)). Under limited circumstances, we may issue permits to authorize incidental take, which is defined under the Act as take that is incidental to, and not the purpose of, otherwise lawful activities. “Take” under the ESA does not apply to plant species and is not prohibited under the ESA; however, the plant species identified in the NCCP/HCP will be listed on the Federal permit as covered species in recognition of the conservation measures provided for them under the Plan and the applicant would receive “No Surprises” regulatory assurances for all covered species under the Federal permit.

Covered Species

The applicant seeks incidental take authorization for 10 animal species and assurances for 3 plant species. Collectively, the 13 listed and unlisted species are referred to as “covered species” by the NCCP/HCP and include 3 plant species (all unlisted), 1 unlisted fish species, 3 reptile species (all unlisted), 4 bird species (2 endangered, 1 threatened, and 1 unlisted), and 2 mammal species (both unlisted). The permit would provide take authorization for all animal species and assurances for those species and all plant species identified by the NCCP/HCP as “covered species.” Take authorized for listed covered animal species would be effective upon permit issuance. For currently unlisted covered animal species, take authorization would become effective concurrent with listing, should the species be listed under the Act during the permit term.

The proposed permit would include the following three federally listed animal species: Least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus; endangered), southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus; endangered), and coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica; threatened). See the EIR/EIS and NCCP/HCP for information on unlisted species proposed for coverage under the permit.

Covered Activities

The NCCP/HCP is intended to protect and sustain viable populations of native plant and animal species and their habitats in perpetuity through avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures. These measures include purchasing lands for permanent conservation, as well as performing restoration on lands currently protected that will enhance habitat to address mitigation requirements associated with the proposed NCCP/HCP. The proposed NCCP/HCP and permit would accommodate the implementation of the OCTA's 13 proposed freeway projects designed to reduce congestion, increase capacity, and improve traffic flow of Orange County's important transportation infrastructure. It would also accommodate management activities conducted on the OCTA acquired lands (or Preserves) within Orange County.

The OCTA's NCCP/HCP Plan Area includes approximately 511,476 ac (206,987 ha), encompassing all of Orange County, California. The NCCP/HCP is intended to function independently of other HCPs within the Orange County region (e.g., Central and Coastal Orange County NCCP/HCP, Orange County Southern HCP, and Western Riverside County's Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan).

As described in the NCCP/HCP and the EIR/EIS, the proposed NCCP/HCP would provide protection measures for species on the OCTA covered freeway projects as well as for covered activities within the OCTA Preserves, in part by including purchase of lands for permanent conservation. Covered activities, including covered freeway projects and covered activities within Preserves, are estimated to directly affect up to 154 ac (62 ha) of habitat and indirectly affect up to 484.4 ac (196 ha) of habitat for covered species that will require mitigation over the 40-year term of the permit. OCTA has purchased seven open-space properties, totaling 1,296 ac (524 ha), of which about 1,232 ac (499 ha) is undeveloped open space and will be available to mitigate for project impacts to covered species. All Preserves will have endowments set up to cover long-term management needs. OCTA has also approved funding for 11 habitat restoration projects in the Plan Area, totaling over 350 ac (142 ha). Future restoration efforts are identified within the NCCP/HCP to further benefit covered species.

The primary source of funding for the NCCP/HCP will derive from the M2 transportation sales tax designed to raise money to improve Orange County's transportation system. As part of the M2 sales tax initiative, a minimum of 5 percent of the revenues from the freeway program will be set aside for the M2 Environmental Mitigation Program (EMP) revenues. These funds will be used for “programmatic mitigation.” The development and implementation of the M2 NCCP/HCP will use a portion of this funding source to achieve higher value environmental benefits such as habitat protection, connectivity, and resource preservation/enhancement in exchange for streamlined project approvals for the M2 freeway projects. The expenditures for key components of the NCCP/HCP conservation strategy that achieve upfront and comprehensive mitigation (e.g., Preserve acquisitions and funding of restoration projects) will be paid for through M2 EMP revenues. Any costs associated with implementing avoidance and minimization measures, as described in Section 5.6, “Avoidance and Minimization,” will be funded through the individual construction budgets and will not rely on funding under the M2 EMP.

The NCCP/HCP includes measures to avoid and minimize incidental take of the covered species, emphasizing project design modifications to protect covered species and their habitats. A monitoring and reporting plan would gauge the Plan's success based on achievement of biological goals and objectives and would ensure that conservation keeps pace with development. The NCCP/HCP also includes a management program, including adaptive management, which allows for changes in the conservation program if the biological species objectives are not met, or new information becomes available to improve the efficacy of the NCCP/HCP's conservation strategy.

Covered projects and activities would include 13 discrete proposed freeway segments in which freeway projects have been identified for coverage under the NCCP/HCP. These proposed projects are designed to reduce congestion, increase capacity, and smooth traffic flows of Orange County's important transportation infrastructure. In addition, activities related to ongoing habitat management, restoration, and monitoring activities by Preserve Managers and activities necessary to provide limited public access have been identified for coverage. These covered activities fall under two major categories, including:

The EIR/EIS analyzes two alternatives in addition to the proposed action (i.e., permit issuance based on the NCCP/HCP) described above. The other alternatives include a no-action (i.e., no permit) alternative and a reduced plan alternative covering only species that are federally or State-listed as threatened or endangered. Two other alternatives were considered during the planning process but were not evaluated because they did not meet the purpose and need of both the OCTA and the Service; these alternatives involved a no-take alternative and an alternative requiring the OCTA to participate in project-by-project mitigation.

The final EIR/EIS includes all comments we received on the draft EIR/EIS and our response to those comments. After the 30-day waiting period, we will complete a record of decision that announces our decision on the action that will be implemented and discusses all factors leading to the decision.

Public Review

Copies of the final EIR/EIS, NCCP/HCP, and IA are available for review (see Availability of Documents). Any comments we receive will become part of the administrative record and may be available to the public. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly available at any time. While you may ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

Authority:

We publish this notice under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347 et seq.; NEPA), and its implementing regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 40 CFR 1500-1508, as well as in compliance with section 10(c) of the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544 et seq.; Act).

We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, invite the public to comment on the following applications to conduct certain activities with endangered species. With some exceptions, the Endangered Species Act (Act) prohibits activities with endangered and threatened species unless a Federal permit allows such activity. The Act also requires that we invite public comment before issuing recovery permits to conduct certain activities with endangered species.

DATES:

Comments on these permit applications must be received on or before May 1, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

Written data or comments should be submitted to the Endangered Species Program Manager, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 8, 2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2606, Sacramento, CA 95825 (telephone: 916-414-6464; fax: 916-414-6486). Please refer to the respective permit number for each application when submitting comments.

The following applicants have applied for scientific research permits to conduct certain activities with endangered species under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). We seek review and comment from local, State, and Federal agencies and the public on the following permit requests.

The applicant requests a permit renewal and amendment to take (harass by survey, capture, handle, and release) the Tipton kangaroo rat (Dipodomys nitratoides nitratoides) and giant kangaroo rat (Dipodomys ingens), in conjunction with survey activities throughout the range of the species in California for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

Permit No. TE-180579Applicant: Dwayne Oberhoff, Los Osos, California

The applicant requests a permit renewal to take (harass by survey, capture, handle, and release) the Morro shoulderband snail (Banded dune) (Helminthoglypta walkeriana) in conjunction with survey activities in San Luis Obispo County, California, for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

Permit No. TE-090849Applicant: David Wolff, Los Osos, California

The applicant requests a permit renewal to take (harass by survey, capture, handle, release, collect vouchers, and collect branchiopod cysts) the Conservancy fairy shrimp (Branchinecta conservatio), longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta longiantenna), San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis), Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni), and vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi) in conjunction with survey activities throughout the range of the species in California for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

The applicant requests a permit renewal to take (harass by survey, capture, handle, and release) the unarmored threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus williamsoni) in conjunction with survey activities throughout the range of the species in California, for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

Permit No. TE-179036Applicant: Cullen Wilkerson, Richmond, California

The applicant requests a permit renewal to take (harass by survey, capture, handle, mark, and release) the San Francisco garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia); and take (harass by survey, capture, handle, and release) the California tiger salamander ((central distinct population segment (DPS)) (Ambystoma californiense)) in conjunction with survey activities throughout the range of the species in California for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

The applicant requests a permit renewal to take (harass by survey, capture, handle, and release) the California tiger salamander (Santa Barbara County and Sonoma County Distinct Population Segment (DPS)) (Ambystoma californiense) in conjunction with survey activities throughout the range of the species in California for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

Permit No. TE-90000AApplicant: Ryan Brown, Chico, California

The applicant requests a permit renewal to take (harass by survey, capture, handle, release, collect vouchers, and collect branchiopod cysts) the Conservancy fairy shrimp (Branchinecta conservatio), longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta longiantenna), San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis), Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni), and vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi) in conjunction with survey activities throughout the range of the species in California for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

The applicant requests a permit renewal to take (receive, hold in captivity, handle, provide veterinary services, transport, and transfer) the California condor (Gymnogyps californianus) in conjunction with general husbandry activities at the Santa Barbara Zoo in Santa Barbara, California for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

Permit No. TE-17017CApplicant: Shelley Sianta, Santa Cruz, California

The applicant requests a new permit to remove/reduce to possession from lands under Federal jurisdiction Clarkia franciscana (Presidio clarkia) in conjunction with research activities throughout the range of the species in California for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

The applicant requests a new permit to remove/reduce to possession from lands under Federal jurisdiction Fremontodendron mexicanum (Mexican flannelbush), Chloropyron maritimum subsp. maritimum (Cordylanthus maritimus subsp. maritimus) (salt marsh bird's-beak), and Ambrosia pumila (San Diego ambrosia) in conjunction with research activities throughout the range of the species in California for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

The applicant requests a new permit to take (harass by survey; locate and monitor nests; remove brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater) eggs and chicks from parasitized nests; and capture, measure, weigh, band, color-band, and release) the least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) and southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) in conjunction with survey, population monitoring, and scientific research activities throughout the range of the species in California, Nevada, and Arizona for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

The applicant requests a permit amendment to take (harass by survey, capture, handle, collect tissue samples, use remote camera traps, use directional fencing, and release) the California tiger salamander (Santa Barbara County and Sonoma County Distinct Population Segment (DPS)) (Ambystoma californiense) in conjunction with survey and research activities throughout the range of the species in California for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

The applicant requests a permit amendment to take (harass by performing radio tracking studies) the Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog (Rana sierrae) in conjunction with research activities throughout the range of the species for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

Permit No. TE-092469Applicant: Ingrid Eich, Irvine, California

The applicant requests a permit renewal to take (harass by survey, capture, handle, release, collect vouchers, and collect branchiopod cysts) the Conservancy fairy shrimp (Branchinecta conservatio), longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta longiantenna), San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis), Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni), and vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi) in conjunction with survey activities throughout the range of the species in California for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

The applicant requests a permit renewal to take (harass by survey, capture, handle, and release) the California tiger salamander (Santa Barbara County and Sonoma County Distinct Population Segment (DPS)) (Ambystoma californiense) in conjunction with survey activities throughout the range of the species in California for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

Permit No. TE-19906CApplicant: Ross Taylor, Mckinleyville, California

The applicant requests a new permit to take (harass by survey, capture, handle, and release) the tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi) in Humboldt County, California, in conjunction with survey activities for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

Permit No. TE-780566Applicant: Ruben Ramirez, Oceanside, California

The applicant requests a permit renewal to take (harass by survey, capture, handle, and release) the Pacific pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris pacificus) and San Bernardino Merriam's kangaroo rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus); take (harass by survey, capture, handle, swab, attach radio transmitters, and release) the arroyo toad (arroyo southwestern) (Anaxyrus californicus) in conjunction with survey and scientific research activities throughout the range of the species in California for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

The applicant requests a permit renewal take (survey by pursuit) the Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) in conjunction with survey activities throughout the range of the species in California, for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

Permit No. TE-799569Applicant: Renee Owens, El Cajon, California

The applicant requests a permit renewal take (survey by pursuit) the Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) and take (locate and monitor nests) least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) in conjunction with survey activities throughout the range of the species in California, for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

The applicant requests a permit renewal to take (survey by pursuit) the Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino), Delhi Sands flower-loving fly (Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis), and Laguna Mountains skipper (Pyrgus ruralis lagunae) in conjunction with survey activities throughout the range of the species for the purpose of enhancing the species' survival.

Public Comments

We invite public review and comment on each of these recovery permit applications. Comments and materials we receive will be available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the address listed in the ADDRESSES section of this notice.

Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has examined and found suitable for classification for conveyance under the provisions of the Recreation and Public Purposes (R&PP) Act, as amended, 211.73 acres of public land in Cibola County, New Mexico. Cibola County proposes to use the land to develop a public shooting range complex.

DATES:

Interested parties may submit written comments regarding the proposed classification of the land for conveyance to the Field Manager, Rio Puerco Field Office, at the address below on or before May 15, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

Written comments should be addressed to the Bureau of Land Management, Field Manager, Rio Puerco Field Office, 100 Sun Avenue NE., Suite 330, Pan American Bldg., Albuquerque, NM 87109. Please reference “R&PP of Public Lands to Cibola County for Shooting Range” on all correspondence.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Arlene Salazar, Realty Specialist, Rio Puerco Field Office, 505-761-8772, email: asalazar@blm.gov, or at the above address. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 to contact the above individual during normal business hours. The Service is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question for the above individual. Replies are provided during normal business hours.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The following described public land has been examined and found suitable for classification for conveyance to Cibola County under Section 7 of the Taylor Grazing Act (43 U.S.C. 315f) and the provisions of the R&PP Act, as amended (43 U.S.C. 869 et seq.):

The area described contains 211.73 acres, more or less, in Cibola County, New Mexico.

The land is not needed for any Federal purpose and is not of national significance. Conveyance is consistent with the BLM Rio Puerco Resource Management Plan, October 1992, and would be in the public interest.

The conveyance document, if issued, would be subject to the provisions of the R&PP Act and applicable regulations of the Secretary of the Interior and will contain the following reservations, terms, and conditions:

1. Right-of-way NMNM 57859 issued to the U.S. Forest Service for a road to access Forest Service land adjacent to the subject parcel.

2. A right-of-way thereon for ditches or canals constructed by authority of the United States, pursuant to the Act of August 30, 1890, 43 U.S.C. 945.

3. All minerals shall be reserved to the United States, together with the right to prospect for, mine, and remove the minerals under applicable laws and such regulations as the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe including all necessary access and exit rights.

4. The purchaser, by accepting the patent, agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold the United States harmless from any costs, damages, claims, causes of action, penalties, fines, liabilities, and judgments of any kind arising from the past, present, or future acts or omissions of the patentee, its employees, agents, contractors, or lessees, or third party arising out of or in connection with the use and/or occupancy of the patented real property resulting in: (1) Violations of Federal, state, and local laws and regulations that are now, or in the future become, applicable to the real property; (2) Judgments, claims, or demands of any kind assessed against the United States; (3) Costs, expenses, or damages of any kind incurred by the United States; (4) Releases or threatened releases of solid or hazardous waste(s) and/or hazardous substance(s), as defined by Federal or state environmental laws, off, on, into, or under land, property, and other interests of the United States; (5) Other activities by which solid or hazardous substances or wastes, as defined by Federal and state environmental laws are generated, released, stored, used, or otherwise disposed of on the patented real property, and any cleanup response, remedial action, or other actions related in any manner to said solid or hazardous substances or wastes; or (6) Natural resource damages as defined by Federal and state law. This covenant will run with the patented real property and may be enforced by the United States in a court of competent jurisdiction.

5. A limited reversionary provision stating that title shall revert to the United States upon a finding, after notice and opportunity for a hearing, that the patentee has not substantially developed the lands in accordance with the approved plan of development on or before the date five years after the date of conveyance. No portion of the land shall, under any circumstance, revert to the United States if any such portion has been used for solid waste disposal or for any other purpose which may result in the disposal, placement, or release of any hazardous substance.

6. Any other terms or conditions that the Authorized Officer determines appropriate to ensure public access and proper management of the Federal land and interests therein. Subject to limitations prescribed by law and regulations, prior to conveyance, a holder of any right-of-way within the conveyed area may be given the opportunity to amend the right-of-way for conversion to a new term, including perpetuity, if applicable. Detailed information concerning this proposed project, including, but not limited to documentation relating to compliance with applicable environmental and cultural resource laws, is available for review at the BLM Rio Puerco Field Office at the address above.

Upon publication of this notice in the Federal Register, the public land described above will be segregated from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws, including the general mining laws, except for conveyance under the R&PP Act, and leasing under the mineral leasing laws.

Classification Comments: Interested parties may submit comments regarding the suitability of the land for the proposed facility. Comments on the classification are restricted to whether the land is physically suited for the proposal, whether the use will maximize the future use (or uses) of the land, whether the use is consistent with local planning and zoning, or whether the use is consistent with Federal and state programs.

Application Comments: Interested parties may submit comments regarding the specific use proposed in the application and plan of development and management, and whether the BLM followed proper administrative procedures in reaching the decision to convey under the R&PP Act.

The BLM New Mexico State Director will review any adverse comments and may sustain, vacate, or modify this realty action. In the absence of any adverse comments, the classification of the land described in this notice will become effective on May 30, 2017. The land will not be available for conveyance until after the classification becomes effective.

Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

Notice of availability of a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement.

SUMMARY:

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is announcing the availability of a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (Draft SEIS) for the Cape Wind Energy Project. This supplement to the 2009 Final EIS has been prepared in response to a 2016 remand order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility v. Hopper, 827 F.3d 1077 (D.C. Cir. 2016). This notice serves to announce the beginning of the public comment period on the Draft SEIS.

On July 5, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the 2009 Cape Wind Energy Project Final EIS and ordered that BOEM: “supplement [the EIS] with adequate geological surveys before Cape Wind may begin construction.” Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility v. Hopper, 827 F.3d 1077, 1084 (D.C. Cir. 2016). The Court opined that: “[w]ithout adequate geological surveys, the [BOEM] cannot `ensure that the seafloor [will be] able to support' wind turbines.” Id. at 1083. While the Court found that: “[BOEM] therefore had violated NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act)” the Court noted that “. . . [it] does not necessarily mean that the project must be halted or that Cape Wind must redo the regulatory approval process.” Id. at 1083-4. The Court explicitly left undisturbed BOEM's 2010 decision to issue the lease and BOEM's 2011 decision to approve the Construction and Operations Plan (COP). Id. at 1084. In light of the remand order and the remaining valid lease and COP, only two alternatives remain relevant to the court's remand: The Proposed Action (affirming BOEM's issuance of the existing lease), and the No Action Alternative (requiring BOEM to rescind lease issuance). In its Draft SEIS, BOEM examines the available geological survey data, including the geotechnical data and reports submitted to BOEM since the 2009 Final EIS, and any other relevant data that relates to the adequacy of the seafloor to support wind turbines in the lease area.

2. Public Comments

BOEM will not hold public hearings during the public review period on the Draft SEIS (see 40 CFR 1506.6(c)). The Draft SEIS is available for review on the BOEM Web site at: https://www.boem.gov/Renewable-Energy-Program/Studies/Cape-Wind.aspx. To obtain a single printed copy of the Draft SEIS, you may contact the Office of Renewable Energy Programs, 45600 Woodland Rd, Sterling, VA 20166. The list of Massachusetts libraries provided a copy of the Draft SEIS can be found at: https://www.boem.gov/Renewable-Energy-Program/Studies/Cape-Wind.aspx. Federal, state, tribal, and local governments and/or agencies and other interested parties may submit written comments on this Draft SEIS through the following methods:

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the field entitled “Enter Keyword or ID,” enter BOEM-2017-0008, and then click “search.” Follow the instructions to submit public comments and view supporting and related materials available for this notice;

2. In written form, delivered by hand or by mail, enclosed in an envelope labeled “Cape Wind Energy Project Draft SEIS” and addressed to Program Manager, Office of Renewable Energy, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 45600 Woodland Road, Sterling, Virginia 20166. Comments must be received or postmarked no later than May 15, 2017.

Public Comment Policy: Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comments to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

Authority: This Notice of Availability to prepare a Draft SEIS is in compliance with NEPA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4231 et seq.), and is published pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.6.

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is announcing the availability of the Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf Lease Sale Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 2018 (2018 Draft Supplemental EIS). The 2018 Draft Supplemental EIS provides an analysis of the potential significant impacts of a proposed action (a region wide lease sale) and reasonable alternatives to the proposed action. This Supplemental EIS is expected to be used to inform decisions on each of the two lease sales scheduled in 2018, and to be supplemented as necessary for future Gulf of Mexico region wide lease sales. This Notice of Availability also serves to announce the beginning of the 45-day public comment period for the Draft Supplemental EIS.

The Draft Supplemental EIS and associated information are available on BOEM's Web site at http://www.boem.gov/nepaprocess/. BOEM will primarily distribute digital copies of the Draft Supplemental EIS on compact discs. You may request a compact disc, a paper copy or the location of a library with a digital copy of the Draft Supplemental EIS from the BOEM, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, Public Information Office (GM 335A), 1201 Elmwood Park Boulevard, New Orleans, Louisiana 70123-2394 or by telephone at 1-800-200-GULF.

2. Through the regulations.gov web portal: Navigate to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket No. BOEM-2017-0001. Click on the “Comment Now!” button to the right of the document link. Enter your information and comment, and then click “Submit.”

BOEM will hold public meetings to obtain comments regarding the Draft Supplemental EIS. These public meetings will be held in an open-house format, and will take place between 4:00 p.m. CDT and 7:00 p.m. CDT. They are scheduled as follows:

BOEM does not consider anonymous comments; please include your name and address as part of your submittal. You should be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comments to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. All submissions from organizations, businesses, and identified individuals will be available for public viewing on regulations.gov.

Authority: This Notice of Availability of a Draft Supplemental EIS is published pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and 43 CFR 46.415.

Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has received a complaint entitled Certain LTE Wireless Communication Devices and Components Thereof, DN 3209; the Commission is soliciting comments on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or complainant's filing pursuant to the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. The public version of the complaint can be accessed on the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov, and will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000.

General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at United States International Trade Commission (USITC) at https://www.usitc.gov . The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Commission has received a complaint and a submission pursuant to § 210.8(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure filed on behalf of LG Electronics, Inc., LG Electronics Alabama, Inc.; and LG Electronics MobileComm U.S.A., Inc. on March 27, 2017. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain LTE wireless communication devices and components thereof. The complaint names as respondents BLU Products, Inc. of Doral, FL and CT Miami, LLC of Doral, FL. The complainants request that the Commission issue a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders.

Proposed respondents, other interested parties, and members of the public are invited to file comments, not to exceed five (5) pages in length, inclusive of attachments, on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or § 210.8(b) filing. Comments should address whether issuance of the relief specifically requested by the complainant in this investigation would affect the public health and welfare in the United States, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or United States consumers.

In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that:

(i) Explain how the articles potentially subject to the requested remedial orders are used in the United States;

(ii) identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the requested remedial orders;

(iii) identify like or directly competitive articles that complainant, its licensees, or third parties make in the United States which could replace the subject articles if they were to be excluded;

(iv) indicate whether complainant, complainant's licensees, and/or third party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the requested exclusion order and/or a cease and desist order within a commercially reasonable time; and

(v) explain how the requested remedial orders would impact United States consumers.

Written submissions must be filed no later than by close of business, eight calendar days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. There will be further opportunities for comment on the public interest after the issuance of any final initial determination in this investigation.

Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above and submit 8 true paper copies to the Office of the Secretary by noon the next day pursuant to § 210.4(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to the docket number (“Docket No. 3209”) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. (See Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, Electronic Filing Procedures 1). Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary (202-205-2000).

Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All information, including confidential business information and documents for which confidential treatment is properly sought, submitted to the Commission for purposes of this Investigation may be disclosed to and used: (i) By the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel,2 solely for cybersecurity purposes. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on EDIS.3

This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and of §§ 201.10 and 210.8(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)).

On March 31, 2017, the Department of Labor (DOL) will submit the Employment and Training Administration (ETA) sponsored information collection request (ICR) titled, “Benefits Timeliness and Quality Review System,” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for continued use, without change, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Public comments on the ICR are invited.

DATES:

The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before May 1, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the RegInfo.gov Web site at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=201702-1205-003 (this link will only become active on the day following publication of this notice) or by contacting Michel Smyth by telephone at 202-693-4129, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at DOL_PRA_PUBLIC@dol.gov.

Submit comments about this request by mail or courier to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-ETA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email: OIRA_submission@omb.eop.gov. Commenters are encouraged, but not required, to send a courtesy copy of any comments by mail or courier to the U.S. Department of Labor-OASAM, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Attn: Departmental Information Compliance Management Program, Room N1301, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; or by email: DOL_PRA_PUBLIC@dol.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michel Smyth by telephone at 202-693-4129, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at DOL_PRA_PUBLIC@dol.gov.

Authority:

44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This ICR seeks to extend PRA authority for the Benefits Timeliness and Quality (BTQ) Review System information collection. The Secretary of Labor has a legal responsibility under Social Security Act (SSA) section 303(a)(1) to reimburse a State Workforce Agency (SWA) the necessary costs of proper and efficient administration of State unemployment insurance (UI) laws. The Secretary must establish a means of measuring a SWA's proper and efficient administration in order to certify a State payment. Among other duties, the Secretary must also ensure that State laws conform to Federal law and the State complies with them, in order for a subject employer within the State to be allowed to receive offset credit under the Federal Unemployment Tax Act. The BTQ Program is one of the ways in which the ETA collects program operating information to meet this obligation. Furthermore, these reports provide data necessary to monitor state performance in UI administration, as mandated by the Secretary of Labor. Social Security Act section 503(a)(6) authorizes this information collection. See 42 U.S.C. 503(a)(6).

This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid Control Number. See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. The DOL obtains OMB approval for this information collection under Control Number 1205-0359.

OMB authorization for an ICR cannot be for more than three (3) years without renewal, and the current approval for this collection is scheduled to expire on March 31, 2017. The DOL seeks to extend PRA authorization for this information collection for three (3) more years, without any change to existing requirements. The DOL notes that existing information collection requirements submitted to the OMB receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review. For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the Federal Register on September 6, 2017 (81 FR 61254).

Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the ADDRESSES section within thirty (30) days of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. In order to help ensure appropriate consideration, comments should mention OMB Control Number 1205-0359. The OMB is particularly interested in comments that:

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

On March 31, 2017, the Department of Labor (DOL) will submit the Office of Labor Management Standards (OLMS) sponsored information collection request (ICR) titled, “Federal Transit Act Urban Program Transit Worker Protections,” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for continued use, without change, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Public comments on the ICR are invited.

DATES:

The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before May 1, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the RegInfo.gov Web site at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=201701-1245-003 (this link will only become active April 1, 2017) or by contacting Michel Smyth by telephone at 202-693-4129, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at DOL_PRA_PUBLIC@dol.gov.

Submit comments about this request by mail or courier to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-OLMS, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email: OIRA_submission@omb.eop.gov. Commenters are encouraged, but not required, to send a courtesy copy of any comments by mail or courier to the U.S. Department of Labor-OASAM, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Attn: Departmental Information Compliance Management Program, Room N1301, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; or by email: DOL_PRA_PUBLIC@dol.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michel Smyth by telephone at 202-693-4129, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at DOL_PRA_PUBLIC@dol.gov.

Authority:

44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This ICR seeks to extend PRA authorization for the information collection requirements needed for the OLMS to administer Federal Transit Act Urban Program worker protections. See 49 U.S.C. 5333(b). The Federal Transit Act Urban Program provides that the DOL must ensure that a recipient of Federal funds used to acquire, improve, or operate a transit system establishes arrangements to protect the rights of affected transit employees. Federal law requires such an arrangement to be fair and equitable, and the DOL must certify the arrangement before the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration (FTA) can award certain funds to grantees. An employee protective arrangement must include provisions that may be necessary for the preservation of rights, privileges, and benefits under existing collective bargaining agreements or otherwise; the continuation of collective bargaining rights; the protection of individual employees against a worsening of their positions related to employment; assurances of employment to employees of acquired transportation systems; assurances of priority of reemployment of employees whose employment is ended or who are laid off; and paid training or retraining programs. See 49 U.S.C. 5333(b)(2).

Pursuant to regulations 29 CFR part 215, upon receipt of copies of applications for Federal assistance subject to 49 U.S.C. 5333(b) from the FTA, together with a request for DOL certification of employee protective arrangements, the DOL processes those applications, which must be in final form. The FTA provides the DOL with information necessary to enable the DOL to process employee protections for certification of the project. Federal Transit Act section 13(c) authorizes this information collection. See 49 U.S.C. 5333(b).

This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid Control Number. See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. The DOL obtains OMB approval for this information collection under Control Number 1245-0006.

OMB authorization for an ICR cannot be for more than three (3) years without renewal, and the current approval for this collection is scheduled to expire on March 31, 2017. The DOL seeks to extend PRA authorization for this information collection for three (3) more years, without any change to existing requirements. The DOL notes that existing information collection requirements submitted to the OMB receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review. For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the Federal Register on January 30, 2017 (81 FR 8766).

Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the ADDRESSES section within thirty (30) days of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. In order to help ensure appropriate consideration, comments should mention OMB Control Number 1245-0006. The OMB is particularly interested in comments that:

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

The BLS is soliciting new members for the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). Five current membership terms expire on May 20, 2017. The TAC provides advice and makes recommendations to the Bureau of Labor Statistics on technical aspects of data collection and the formulation of economic measures. On some technical issues there are differing views, and receiving feedback at public meetings provides BLS with the opportunity to consider all viewpoints. The Committee will consist of 16 members and will be chosen from a cross-section of economists, statisticians, and behavioral scientists who represent a balance of expertise.

DATES:

Nominations for the TAC membership should be postmarked by April 17, 2017.

BLS intends to renew memberships in the TAC for another three years. The Bureau often faces highly technical issues while developing and maintaining the accuracy and relevancy of its data on employment and unemployment, prices, productivity, and compensation and working conditions. These issues range from how to develop new measures to how to make sure that existing measures account for the ever-changing economy. The BLS presents issues and then draws on the specialized expertise of Committee members representing specialized fields within the academic disciplines of economics, statistics and survey design. Committee members are also invited to bring to the attention of BLS, issues that have been identified in the academic literature or in their own research.

The TAC was established to provide advice to the Commissioner of Labor Statistics on technical topics selected by the BLS. Responsibilities include, but are not limited to providing comments on papers and presentations developed by BLS research and program staff, conducting research on issues identified by BLS on which an objective technical opinion or recommendation from outside of BLS would be valuable, recommending BLS conduct internal research projects to address technical problems with BLS statistics that have been identified in the academic literature, participating in discussions of areas where the types or coverage of economic statistics could be expanded or improved and areas where statistics are no longer relevant, and establishing working relationships with professional associations with an interest in BLS statistics, such as the American Statistical Association and the American Economic Association.

Nominations: BLS is looking for committed TAC members who have a strong interest in, and familiarity with, BLS data. The Agency is looking for nominees who use and have a comprehensive understanding of economic statistics. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics is committed to bringing greater diversity of thought, perspective, and experience to its advisory committees. Nominees from all races, gender, age, and disabilities are encouraged to apply. Interested persons may nominate themselves or may submit the name of another person who they believe to be interested in and qualified to serve on the TAC. Nominations may also be submitted by organizations. Nominations should include the name, address, and telephone number of the candidate. Each nomination should include a summary of the candidate's training or experience relating to BLS data specifically, or economic statistics more generally. BLS will conduct a basic background check of candidates before their appointment to the TAC. The background check will involve accessing publicly available, Internet-based sources.

The economists will have research experience with technical issues related to BLS data and will be familiar with employment and unemployment statistics, price index numbers, compensation measures, productivity measures, occupational and health statistics, or other topics relevant to BLS data series. The statisticians will be familiar with sample design, data analysis, computationally intensive statistical methods, non-sampling errors or other areas which are relevant to BLS work. The behavioral scientists will be familiar with questionnaire design, usability or other areas of survey development. BLS invites persons interested in serving on the TAC to submit their names for consideration for committee membership.

Authority: This notice was prepared in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 2, the Secretary of Labor has determined that the Bureau of Labor Statistics Data Users Advisory Committee is in the public interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed upon the Commissioner of Labor Statistics by 29 U.S.C. 1 and 2. This determination follows consultation with the Committee Management Secretariat, General Services Administration.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics Data Users Advisory Committee will meet on Friday, May 19, 2017. The meeting will be held in the Postal Square Building, 2 Massachusetts Avenue NE., Washington, DC.

The Committee provides advice to the Bureau of Labor Statistics from the points of view of data users from various sectors of the U.S. economy, including the labor, business, research, academic, and government communities, on technical matters related to the collection, analysis, dissemination, and use of the Bureau's statistics, on its published reports, and on the broader aspects of its overall mission and function.

The meeting will be held in Meeting Rooms 1, 2, and 3 of the Janet Norwood Conference and Training Center. The schedule and agenda for the meeting are as follows:

The meeting is open to the public. Any questions concerning the meeting should be directed to Kathy Mele, Data Users Advisory Committee, on 202.691.6102. Individuals who require special accommodations should contact Ms. Mele at least two days prior to the meeting date.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 20th day of March 2017.Kimberley D. HillChief, Division of Management Systems, Bureau of Labor Statistics.[FR Doc. 2017-06345 Filed 3-30-17; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4510-24-PDEPARTMENT OF LABORMine Safety and Health AdministrationPetitions for Modification of Application of Existing Mandatory Safety StandardsAGENCY:

Mine Safety and Health Administration, Labor.

ACTION:

Notice.

SUMMARY:

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 and Title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 44 govern the application, processing, and disposition of petitions for modification. This notice is a summary of petitions for modification submitted to the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) by the parties listed below.

DATES:

All comments on the petitions must be received by MSHA's Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances on or before May 1, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit your comments, identified by “docket number” on the subject line, by any of the following methods:

1. Electronic Mail: zzMSHA-comments@dol.gov. Include the docket number of the petition in the subject line of the message.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act) allows the mine operator or representative of miners to file a petition to modify the application of any mandatory safety standard to a coal or other mine if the Secretary of Labor determines that:

1. An alternative method of achieving the result of such standard exists which will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners of such mine by such standard; or

2. That the application of such standard to such mine will result in a diminution of safety to the miners in such mine.

In addition, the regulations at 30 CFR 44.10 and 44.11 establish the requirements and procedures for filing petitions for modification.

Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of the existing standard to mine through oil and gas wells in all mineable coal beds.

(a) As an alternative to leaving 300 feet in diameter coal barriers, the petitioner proposes the following procedures for District Manager (DM) approval:

(1) A safety barrier of 300 feet in diameter (150 feet between any mined area and a well) will be maintained around all oil and gas wells (to include all active, inactive, abandoned, shut-in, and previously plugged wells, and including water injection wells) until approval to proceed with mining has been obtained from the DM.

(2) Prior to mining within the safety barrier around any well, the mine operator will provide the DM a sworn affidavit or declaration executed by a company official stating that all mandatory procedures for cleaning out, preparing, and plugging each oil or gas well has been completed as described by the terms and conditions of this petition.

(b) The petitioner proposes the following procedures for cleaning out and preparing oil and gas wells prior to plugging or replugging:

(1) Completely clean out the well from the surface to at least 200 feet below the base of the lowest mineable coal seam, unless the DM requires cleaning to a greater depth based on his judgment as to what is required due to the geological strata or due to the pressure within the well. Provide the DM all information concerning the geological nature of the strata and the pressure of the well and remove all material from the entire diameter of the well, wall to wall.

(2) Prepare down-hole logs for each well. The logs will consist of a caliper survey and log(s) suitable for determining the top, bottom, and thickness of all coal seams and potential hydrocarbon-producing strata and the location for a bridge plug. The DM may approve the use of a down-hole camera survey in lieu of down-hole logs. In addition, a journal will be maintained describing the depth and nature of each material encountered; bit size and type used to drill each portion of the hole; length and type of each material used to plug the well; length of casing(s) removed, perforated, or ripped or left in place; any sections where casing was cut or milled; and other pertinent information concerning cleaning and sealing the well. Invoices, work-orders, and other records related to all work on the well will be maintained as part of the journal and provided to MSHA on request.

(3) When clearing out the well, make a diligent effort to remove all of the casing, and take appropriate steps to ensure the annulus between the casing and between the casings and the well are filled with expanding cement (minimum 0.5 percent expansion upon setting) and contain no voids. If the casing cannot be removed, the petitioner will cut or mill it at all mineable coal seam levels and perforate or rip it at least every 50 feet from 200 feet below the base of the lowest mineable coal seam up to 100 feet above the uppermost mineable coal seam. Any casing that remains will be perforated or ripped. If it can be demonstrated to the DM using a casing bond log that all annuli in the well are already adequately sealed with cement, the petitioner will not be required to perforate or rip the casing for that particular well. When multiple casing and tubing strings are present in the coal horizon(s), the petitioner will perforate or rip any casing that remains and fill with expanding cement and keep an acceptable casing bond log for each casing and tubing string used in lieu of ripping or perforating multiple strings.

(4) If the DM concludes that the completely cleaned-out well is emitting excessive amounts of gas, a mechanical bridge plug must be placed in the well. The plug must be placed in a competent stratum at least 200 feet below the base of the lowest mineable coal seam, but above the top of the upper most hydrocarbon-producing stratum, unless the DM requires a greater distance based on his or her judgment that it is within the well. If it is not possible to set a mechanical bridge plug, an appropriately sized packer may be used.

(5) The petitioner will properly place mechanical bridge plugs to isolate the hydrocarbon-producing stratum from the expanding cement plug, if the uppermost hydrocarbon-producing stratum is within 300 feet of the base of the lowest mineable coal seam. A minimum of 200 feet of expanding cement will be placed below the lowest mineable coal seam, unless the DM requires a greater distance based on his or her judgment that it is required due to the geological strata or due to the pressure within the well.

(c) After completely cleaning out the well, the petitioner proposes the following procedures for plugging or replugging oil or gas wells to the surface:

(1) The operator will pump expanding cement slurry down the well to form a plug that runs from at least 200 feet below the base of the lowest mineable coal seam to the surface. The expanding cement will be placed in the well under pressure of at least 200 pounds per square inch. Portland cement or a lightweight cement mixture may be used to fill the area from 100 feet above the top of the uppermost mineable coal seam to the surface.

(2) The operator will embed steel turnings or other small magnetic particles in the top of the cement near the surface to serve as a permanent magnetic monument of the well. In the alternative, a 4.5 inch or larger casing, set in cement, will extend at least 36 inches above the ground level with the API well number engraved or welded on the casing. When the hole cannot be marked with a physical monument (i.e. prime farmland), high-resolution GPS coordinates (one-half meter resolution) are required.

(d) The petitioner proposes the following procedures after approval has been granted by the DM to mine within the safety barrier, or to mine through a plugged or replugged well:

(1) Prior to mining through a well, notify the DM and the miners' representative in sufficient time for them to have a representative present.

(2) Install drivage sights at the last open crosscut near the place to be mined to ensure intersection of the well.

(3) Ensure firefighting equipment, including fire extinguishers, rock dust, and sufficient fire hose to reach the working face area of the mine-through is available and operable during all well mine-through. The fire hose will be located in the last open crosscut of the entry or room. Maintain the water line to the belt conveyor tailpiece along with a sufficient amount of fire hose to reach the farthest point of penetration of the section.

(4) Keep available at the last open crosscut a sufficient supply of roof support and ventilation materials. In addition, emergency plugs and suitable sealing materials will be available in the immediate area of the well intersection.

(5) Service all equipment and check permissibility on the shift before mining through the well.

(6) Calibrate the methane monitors on the continuous mining machines on the shift before mining through the well.

(7) When mining is in progress, test methane levels with a hand-held methane detector at least every 10 minutes from the time the mining with that continuous mining machine is within 30 feet of the well until the well is intersected and immediately before mining through it. During the actual cutting process, no individual will be allowed on the return side until the mine-through has been completed and the area has been examined and declared safe.

(8) Keep the working place free from accumulations of coal dust and coal spillages, and place rock dust on the roof, rib, and floor to within 20 feet of the face when mining through the well when using continuous mining machines.

(9) Deenergize all equipment when the well is intersected and thoroughly examine and determine the area is safe before mining is resumed.

(10) After a well has been intersected and the working place determined safe, continue mining inby the well at a distance sufficient to permit adequate ventilation around the area of the well.

(11) If the casing is cut or milled at the coal seam level, the use of torches would not be necessary. However, in rare instances, torches may be used for inadequately or inaccurately cut or milled casings. No open flames will be permitted in the area until adequate ventilation has been established around the wellbore and methane levels of less than 1.0 percent are present in all areas that will be exposed to flames and sparks from the torch. The operator will apply a thick layer of rock dust to the roof, face, floor ribs and any exposed coal within 20 feet of the casing before using any torches.

(12) Non-sparking (brass) tools will be located on the working section and will be used to expose and examine cased wells.

(13) No person will be permitted in the area of the mine-through operation except those actually engaged in the operation, including company personnel, miners' representatives, MSHA personnel, and personnel from the appropriate State agency.

(14) Alert all personnel in the mine to the planned intersection of the well prior to their going underground if the planned intersection is to occur during their shift. This warning will be repeated for all shifts until the well has been mined through.

(15) A certified individual will directly supervise the mine-through operation and only that certified individual in charge will issue instructions concerning the mine-through operation. MSHA personnel may interrupt or halt the mine-through operation when it is necessary for miners' safety.

A copy of the approved petition will be maintained at the mine and be available to the miners.

Within 30 days after this proposed decision and order (PDO) becomes final, the petitioner will submit proposed revisions for its approved part 48 training plan to the DM. These revisions will include initial and refresher training regarding compliance with the terms and conditions stated in the PDO. The petitioner will provide training to all miners involved in the mine-through of a well regarding the requirements of the PDO before mining within 150 feet of the next well to be mined through.

Within 30 days after the PDO becomes final, the petitioner will submit proposed revisions for its approved mine emergency evacuation and firefighting plan required by 30 CRFR 75.1501. The petitioner will revise the plans to include the hazards and evacuation procedures to be used for well intersections. All underground miners will be trained in this revised plan within 30 days of the DM's approval of the revised evacuation plan.

The petitioner asserts that the proposed alternative method will provide a measure of protection greater than the existing standard to all miners at the Riveredge Mine.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 and Title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 44 govern the application, processing, and disposition of petitions for modification.

I. Background

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act) allows the mine operator or representative of miners to file a petition to modify the application of any mandatory safety standard to a coal or other mine if the Secretary of Labor determines that:

1. An alternative method of achieving the result of such standard exists which will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners of such mine by such standard; or

2. That the application of such standard to such mine will result in a diminution of safety to the miners in such mine.

In addition, the regulations at 30 CFR 44.10 and 44.11 establish the requirements and procedures for filing petitions for modification.

Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of the existing standard to permit the use of nonpermissible electronic testing or diagnostic equipment inby the last open crosscut. The petitioner states that:

(2) All nonpermissible testing and diagnostic equipment used in or inby the last open crosscut will be examined by a qualified person, as defined in 30 CFR 75.153, before use to ensure the equipment is being maintained in a safe operating condition. The examinations results will be recorded weekly in the examination book and will be made available to MSHA and the miners at the mine.

(3) A qualified person, as defined in 30 CFR 75.151, will continuously monitor for methane immediately before and during the use of nonpermissible electronic testing and diagnostic equipment in or inby the last open crosscut.

(4) Nonpermissible electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will not be used if methane is detected in concentrations at or above 1.0 percent. When a 1.0 percent or more methane concentration is detected while the nonpermissible electronic equipment is being used, the equipment will be deenergized immediately and the nonpermissible equipment withdrawn outby the last open crosscut.

(5) All hand-held methane detectors will be MSHA-approved and maintained in permissible and proper operating condition as defined in 30 CFR 75.320.

(6) Except for time necessary to troubleshoot under actual mining conditions, coal production in the section will cease. However, coal may remain in or on the equipment to test and diagnose the equipment under “load.”

(7) All electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will be used in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations.

(8) Qualified personnel who use electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will be properly trained to recognize the hazards and limitations associated with use of the equipment.

The petitioner asserts that the proposed alternative method will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded by the existing standard.

Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of the existing standard to permit the use of nonpermissible electronic testing or diagnostic equipment in return air outby the last open crosscut. The petitioner states that:

(2) All nonpermissible testing and diagnostic equipment used in return air outby the last open crosscut will be examined by a qualified person, as defined in 30 CFR 75.153, before use to ensure the equipment is being maintained in a safe operating condition. These examinations results will be recorded weekly in the examination book and will be made available to MSHA and the miners at the mine.

(3) A qualified person, as defined in 30 CFR 75.151, will continuously monitor for methane immediately before and during the use of nonpermissible electronic testing and diagnostic equipment in return air outby the last open crosscut.

(4) Nonpermissible electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will not be used if methane is detected in concentrations at or above 1.0 percent. When a 1.0 percent or more methane concentration is detected while the nonpermissible electronic equipment is being used, the equipment will be deenergized immediately and withdrawn from the return air outby the last open crosscut.

(5) All hand-held methane detectors will be MSHA-approved and maintained in permissible and proper operating condition as defined in 30 CFR 75.320.

(6) All electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will be used in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations.

(7) Qualified personnel who use electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will be properly trained to recognize the hazards and limitations associated with use of the equipment.

The petitioner asserts that the proposed alternative method will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded by the existing standard.

Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of the existing standard to permit the use of nonpermissible electronic testing or diagnostic equipment within 150 feet of pillar workings or longwall faces. The petitioner states that:

(2) All nonpermissible testing and diagnostic equipment used within 150 feet of pillar workings or longwall faces will be examined by a qualified person, as defined in 30 CFR 75.153, before use to ensure the equipment is being maintained in a safe operating condition. These examinations results will be recorded in the weekly examination book and will be made available to MSHA and the miners at the mine.

(3) A qualified person, as defined in 30 CFR 75.151, will continuously monitor for methane immediately before and during the use of nonpermissible electronic testing and diagnostic equipment within 150 feet of pillar workings or longwall faces.

(4) Nonpermissible electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will not be used if methane is detected in concentrations at or above 1.0 percent. When a 1.0 percent or more methane concentration is detected while the nonpermissible electronic equipment is being used, the equipment will be deenergized immediately and withdrawn to fresh air (intake air entry) more than 150 feet from pillar workings and longwall faces.

(5) All hand-held methane detectors will be MSHA-approved and maintained in permissible and proper operating condition as defined in 30 CFR 75.320.

(6) Except for time necessary to troubleshoot under actual mining conditions, coal production in the section will cease. Accumulations of coal and combustible materials referenced in 30 CFR 75.400 will be removed before testing begins to provide additional safety to miners.

(7) All electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will be used in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations.

(8) Qualified personnel who use electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will be properly trained to recognize the hazards and limitations associated with use of the equipment.

The petitioner asserts that the proposed alternative method will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded by the existing standard.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 and 30 CFR part 44 govern the application, processing, and disposition of petitions for modification. This Federal Register Notice notifies the public that MSHA has investigated and issued a final decision on certain mine operator petitions to modify a safety standard.

ADDRESSES:

Copies of the final decisions are posted on MSHA's Web site at http://www.msha.gov/READROOM/PETITION.HTM. The public may inspect the petitions and final decisions during normal business hours in MSHA's Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, Virginia 22202. All visitors are required to check in at the receptionist's desk in Suite 4E401.

Under section 101 of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, a mine operator may petition and the Secretary of Labor (Secretary) may modify the application of a mandatory safety standard to that mine if the Secretary determines that: (1) An alternative method exists that will guarantee no less protection for the miners affected than that provided by the standard; or (2) the application of the standard will result in a diminution of safety to the affected miners.

MSHA bases the final decision on the petitioner's statements, any comments and information submitted by interested persons, and a field investigation of the conditions at the mine. In some instances, MSHA may approve a petition for modification on the condition that the mine operator complies with other requirements noted in the decision.

II. Granted Petitions for Modification

On the basis of the findings of MSHA's investigation, and as designee of the Secretary, MSHA has granted or partially granted the following petitions for modification:

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 and Title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 44 govern the application, processing, and disposition of petitions for modification. This notice is a summary of petitions for modification submitted to the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) by the parties listed below.

DATES:

All comments on the petitions must be received by MSHA's Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances on or before May 1, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit your comments, identified by “docket number” on the subject line, by any of the following methods:

1. Electronic Mail: zzMSHA-comments@dol.gov. Include the docket number of the petition in the subject line of the message.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act) allows the mine operator or representative of miners to file a petition to modify the application of any mandatory safety standard to a coal or other mine if the Secretary of Labor determines that:

1. An alternative method of achieving the result of such standard exists which will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners of such mine by such standard; or

2. That the application of such standard to such mine will result in a diminution of safety to the miners in such mine.

In addition, the regulations at 30 CFR 44.10 and 44.11 establish the requirements and procedures for filing petitions for modification.

Mine: San Juan Mine 1, MSHA I.D. No. 29-02170, located in San Juan County, New Mexico.

Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 75.1506(c)(1) (Refuge alternatives).

Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of the existing standard to provide a Built-In-Place Refuge Alternative (BIP-RA), equipped with a borehole to the surface to provide continuous ventilation flow into the BIP-RA, located at a distance not greater than 5,000 feet from the nearest working face in lieu of the existing standard that utilizes portable, self-contained systems. The petitioner states that:

(1) Each miner wears or carries a 1-hour self-contained, self-rescuer (SCSR) and is provided with a second 1-hour unit stored on the working section. That second device can be a self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) or additional SCSR devices.

(2) The petitioner proposes to provide SCBA escape equipment on each working section and locate a means of refilling that SCBA in between the nearest working face and the BIP-RA so that an evacuating miner can refill their device on the way to the BIP-RA if necessary. The BIP-RA would be located not more than 5,000 feet from the nearest working face.

(3) During performance testing it has been demonstrated that when walking in the San Juan Mine, a miner can travel over 7,500 feet in 30 minutes.

(4) The BIP-RA breathable air components, harmful gas removal components, and air monitoring components of these installations are MSHA Part 7 approved. This includes the surface and underground components involved and listed in the Part 7 approvals.

(5) The BIP-RA structure and door have been analyzed by a third-party engineering firm with experience in designing bulkheads for the nuclear industry. That firm completed a full analysis of the walls and doors. Their analysis certifies that the structure and doors meet or exceed the 15 psi requirement. The over structure and door design has been approved by the District Manager (DM) as required by 30 CFR 75.1506(a)(2).

(6) These BIP-RA structures have a dedicated borehole to the surface that provides continuous flow of fresh air to the structure at all times via the ventilation forces exerted by the mine's main ventilation fan. When in use, this airflow is supplemented by individual blower fans that are powered by generators. One set of the equipment is maintained for each BIP-RA in service and backup components are also maintained on-site.

(7) The petitioner states that the continuous airflow through the BIP-RA removes heat and humidity and prevents the interior of the structure from exceeding an apparent temperature of 95 degrees Fahrenheit.

(8) The petitioner states that National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) studies has revealed that up to 60 percent of the contamination concentration outside the RA could enter the RA by miners entering the structure. A BIP-RA with a dedicated borehole providing continuous airflow addresses that contamination risk by continually diluting the concentration without the limitation of a fixed quantity of purge air. This continuous airflow eliminates the issues of having a finite quantity of breathable air such as currently provided by portable, self-contained systems.

(9) The petitioner states that NIOSH research has shown that a BIP-RA that is provided with a dedicated borehole offers a significant improvement over the use of self-contained systems. NIOSH has stated that if a BIP-RA with a dedicated borehole is used, spacing of those systems can be up to 5,000 feet from the face.

(10) NIOSH recommends taking steps to ensure post-disaster communications from within an occupied RA to the surface. The use of dedicated borehole provides a separate, protected communications pathway from inside the BIP-RA to the surface by routing a communication cable up through the borehole to the surface.

(11) A portable, self-contained RA has a finite length of time that it will provide refuge to miners, and that length of time is impacted by the number of miners inside the RA. If rescue exceeds that finite timeframe, the miners' air supply would be exhausted. These BIP-RA structures at San Juan Mine can be ventilated indefinitely via that dedicated borehole.

Within 60 days after the proposed decision (PDO) and order becomes final, the petitioner will submit proposed revisions for its approved 30 CFR 48 training plan to the DM if MSHA determines that current ongoing training conducted under the existing Emergency Response Plan needs to be supplemented. Such proposed revisions will specify the terms and conditions stated in the PDO.

The petitioner submits that for the reasons and on the terms stated above, utilizing BIP-RAs with dedicated boreholes to the surface equipped with Part 7 approved breathable air components, harmful gas removal components, and air monitoring components, will at all times provide an equivalent or even greater measure of protection as that afforded by the current standard.

Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of the existing standard to start a mine rescue station consisting of only six self-contained breathing apparatus for a single team at the Joliet mine. The petitioner states that:

(1) There is not enough manpower at the mine to fully staff two functional teams.

(2) As a backup mine rescue team, a fully equipped team from another active mine within two hours of the Joliet mine will be secured through written agreement.

The petitioner asserts that the alternative method will at all times provide the same measure of protection as the existing standard.

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 and Title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 44 govern the application, processing, and disposition of petitions for modification.

I. Background

Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act) allows the mine operator or representative of miners to file a petition to modify the application of any mandatory safety standard to a coal or other mine if the Secretary of Labor determines that:

1. An alternative method of achieving the result of such standard exists which will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners of such mine by such standard; or

2. That the application of such standard to such mine will result in a diminution of safety to the miners in such mine.

In addition, the regulations at 30 CFR 44.10 and 44.11 establish the requirements and procedures for filing petitions for modification.

Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of the existing standard to permit the use of nonpermissible electronic testing or diagnostic equipment inby the last open crosscut. The petitioner states that:

(1) Nonpermissible electronic testing and diagnostic equipment to be used includes: Laptop computers; oscilloscopes; vibration analysis machines; cable fault detectors; point temperatures probes; infrared temperature devices; insulation testers (meggers); voltage, current, resistance meters and power testers, and electronic tachometers. Other testing and diagnostic equipment may be used if approved in advance by the MSHA District Manager.

(2) All nonpermissible testing and diagnostic equipment used in or inby the last open crosscut will be examined by a qualified person, as defined in 30 CFR 75.153, before use to ensure the equipment is being maintained in a safe operating condition. The examinations results will be recorded weekly in the examination book and will be made available to MSHA and the miners at the mine.

(3) A qualified person, as defined in 30 CFR 75.151, will continuously monitor for methane immediately before and during the use of nonpermissible electronic testing and diagnostic equipment in or inby the last open crosscut.

(4) Nonpermissible electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will not be used if methane is detected in concentrations at or above 1.0 percent. When a 1.0 percent or more methane concentration is detected while the nonpermissible electronic equipment is being used, the equipment will be deenergized immediately and the nonpermissible equipment withdrawn outby the last open crosscut.

(5) All hand-held methane detectors will be MSHA-approved and maintained in permissible and proper operating condition as defined in 30 CFR 75.320.

(6) Except for time necessary to troubleshoot under actual mining conditions, coal production in the section will cease. However, coal may remain in or on the equipment to test and diagnose the equipment under “load.”

(7) All electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will be used in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations.

(8) Qualified personnel who use electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will be properly trained to recognize the hazards and limitations associated with use of the equipment.

The petitioner asserts that the proposed alternative method will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded by the existing standard.

Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of the existing standard to permit the use of nonpermissible electronic testing or diagnostic equipment in return air outby the last open crosscut. The petitioner states that:

(1) Nonpermissible electronic testing and diagnostic equipment to be used includes: Laptop computers; oscilloscopes; vibration analysis machines; cable fault detectors; point temperatures probes; infrared temperature devices; insulation testers (meggers); voltage, current, resistance meters and power testers, and electronic tachometers. Other testing and diagnostic equipment may be used if approved in advance by the MSHA District Manager.

(2) All nonpermissible testing and diagnostic equipment used in return air outby the last open crosscut will be examined by a qualified person, as defined in 30 CFR 75.153, before use to ensure the equipment is being maintained in a safe operating condition. These examinations results will be recorded weekly in the examination book and will be made available to MSHA and the miners at the mine.

(3) A qualified person, as defined in 30 CFR 75.151, will continuously monitor for methane immediately before and during the use of nonpermissible electronic testing and diagnostic equipment in return air outby the last open crosscut.

(4) Nonpermissible electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will not be used if methane is detected in concentrations at or above 1.0 percent. When a 1.0 percent or more methane concentration is detected while the nonpermissible electronic equipment is being used, the equipment will be deenergized immediately and withdrawn from the return air outby the last open crosscut.

(5) All hand-held methane detectors will be MSHA-approved and maintained in permissible and proper operating condition as defined in 30 CFR 75.320.

(6) All electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will be used in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations.

(7) Qualified personnel who use electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will be properly trained to recognize the hazards and limitations associated with use of the equipment.

The petitioner asserts that the proposed alternative method will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded by the existing standard.

Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of the existing standard to permit the use of nonpermissible electronic testing or diagnostic equipment within 150 feet of pillar workings or longwall faces. The petitioner states that:

(1) Nonpermissible electronic testing and diagnostic equipment to be used includes: Laptop computers; oscilloscopes; vibration analysis machines; cable fault detectors; point temperatures probes; infrared temperature devices; insulation testers (meggers); voltage, current, resistance meters and power testers, and electronic tachometers. Other testing and diagnostic equipment may be used if approved in advance by the MSHA District Manager.

(2) All nonpermissible testing and diagnostic equipment used within 150 feet of pillar workings or longwall faces will be examined by a qualified person, as defined in 30 CFR 75.153, before use to ensure the equipment is being maintained in a safe operating condition. These examinations results will be recorded in the weekly examination book and will be made available to MSHA and the miners at the mine.

(3) A qualified person, as defined in 30 CFR 75.151, will continuously monitor for methane immediately before and during the use of nonpermissible electronic testing and diagnostic equipment within 150 feet of pillar workings or longwall faces.

(4) Nonpermissible electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will not be used if methane is detected in concentrations at or above 1.0 percent. When a 1.0 percent or more methane concentration is detected while the nonpermissible electronic equipment is being used, the equipment will be deenergized immediately and withdrawn to fresh air (intake air entry) more than 150 feet from pillar workings and longwall faces.

(5) All hand-held methane detectors will be MSHA-approved and maintained in permissible and proper operating condition as defined in 30 CFR 75.320.

(6) Except for time necessary to troubleshoot under actual mining conditions, coal production in the section will cease. Accumulations of coal and combustible materials referenced in 30 CFR 75.400 will be removed before testing begins to provide additional safety to miners.

(7) All electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will be used in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations.

(8) Qualified personnel who use electronic testing and diagnostic equipment will be properly trained to recognize the hazards and limitations associated with use of the equipment.

The petitioner asserts that the proposed alternative method will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded by the existing standard.

The National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) will be submitting the following information collection requests to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, on or after the date of publication of this notice.

DATES:

Comments should be received on or before May 1, 2017 to be assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES:

Send comments regarding the burden estimate, or any other aspect of the information collection, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to (1) Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for NCUA, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503, or email at OIRA_Submission@OMB.EOP.gov and (2) NCUA PRA Clearance Officer, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314, Suite 5067, or email at PRAComments@ncua.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Copies of the submission may be obtained by contacting Dawn Wolfgang, NCUA PRA Clearance Officer, at (703) 548-2279, emailing PRAComments@ncua.gov, or viewing the entire information collection request at www.reginfo.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

OMB Number: 3133-0151.

Title: Leasing, 12 CFR part 714.

Abstract: Section 714.5 of NCUA's Regulations requires a federal credit union engaged in leasing to obtain or have on file financial documentation demonstrating that the guarantor of an estimated residual value has the resources to meet the guarantee. Estimated residual value is the projected future value of leased property at lease end. The accuracy of the estimated residual values used in a lease program is a fundamental element in the success or failure of a lease program. The higher the estimated residual values used by a federal credit union, the greater the potential for loss. To mitigate this risk, the leasing rule requires that if the amount of the estimated residual value relied on by the federal credit union to satisfy the full payout lease requirement exceeds 25 percent of the original cost of the leased property, the credit union must obtain a guarantee of the excess from a financially capable party.

If the guarantor cannot meet its guarantee, a federal credit union may suffer serious financial loss. Accordingly, it is important that a federal credit union documents that a guarantor has the financial resources and capability to meet the guarantee. If the guarantor is an insurance company, the federal credit union may satisfy this record keeping requirement by obtaining and maintaining information demonstrating that the insurance company has a rating equivalent to a B+ or better from a major rating company.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Affected Public: Private Sector: Not-for-profit institutions.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 680.

OMB Number: 3133-0135.

Title: Authorization Agreement for Electronic Funds Transfer Payment.

Abstract: The NCUA is required under the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 to issue payments to credit unions and all other entities electronically. The “Authorization Agreement for Electronic Funds Transfer Payment” form is used to maintain up-to-date and accurate electronic payment data for new and existing credit unions. NCUA uses this information to update their electronic routing and transit database to enable transmittal of funds and payments. This collection of information is needed to allow NCUA authorization to make financial transactions electronically through the Automated Clearing House (ACH) in compliance with the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996.

Abstract: Regulation C, 12 CFR part 1003, requires financial institutions that meet certain thresholds to report data annually about: Each application or loan, including the application date; the action taken and the date of that action; the loan amount; the loan type, and purpose; and, if the loan is sold, the type of purchaser; Each applicant or borrower, including ethnicity, race, sex, and income; and Each property, including location and occupancy status.

A covered lender generally must update information quarterly and must submit the completed loan application register (LAR) annually to the appropriate Federal agency by March 1 of the year following the year covered by the LAR. The Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) then prepares a disclosure statement from data submitted by the financial institutions, and provides the disclosure statement to the financial institution to make available at its home office. A covered lender must make each public disclosure statement available to the public for five years and retain its completed LAR for three years.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Affected Public: Private Sector: Not-for-profit institutions.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 74,542.

By Gerard Poliquin, Secretary of the Board, the National Credit Union Administration, on March 28, 2017.

The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a preclearance consultation program to provide the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA95). This program helps to ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirements on respondents can be properly assessed. Currently, the NEA is soliciting comments concerning the proposed information collection on arts participation in the U.S. A copy of the current information collection request can be obtained by contacting the office listed below in the address section of this notice.

DATES:

Written comments must be submitted to the office listed in the address section below within 60 days from the date of this publication in the Federal Register. The NEA is particularly interested in comments which:

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is correcting a notice that was published in the Federal Register (FR) on March 22, 2017, granting an exemption to allow a departure from the certification information of Tier 1 of the generic design control document and issuing License Amendment No. 59 to Combined Licenses NPF-93 and NPF-94. This action is necessary to correct the Federal rulemaking Web site, www.regulations.gov, Docket ID.

DATES:

The correction is effective March 31, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2008-0441 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods:

• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2008-0441. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

• NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced in this document (if that document is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that a document is referenced.

In the FR on March 22, 2017, in FR Doc. 2017-05686, on page 14757, in the third column, in the heading, in the first sentence of the ADDRESSES section, and the first bullet in the ADDRESSES section, correct “NRC-2008-0252” to read “NRC-2008-0441.”

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) invites public comment on the renewal of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for an existing collection of information. The information collection is entitled, “NRC Form 64, “Travel Voucher” (Part 1); NRC Form 64A, “Travel Voucher” (Part 2); and NRC Form 64B, “Optional Travel Voucher” (Part 2).

DATES:

Submit comments by May 30, 2017. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0203. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2016-0203 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

• Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0203. A copy of the collection of information and related instructions may be obtained without charge by accessing Docket ID NRC-2016-0203 on this Web site.

• NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. A copy of the collection of information and related instructions may be obtained without charge by accessing ADAMS Accession number ML17012A320.

• NRC's Clearance Officer: A copy of the collection of information and related instructions may be obtained without charge by contacting NRC's Clearance Officer, David Cullison, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2084; email: INFOCOLLECTS.Resource@NRC.GOV.

B. Submitting Comments

Please include Docket ID NRC-2016-0203 in the subject line of your comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make your comment submission available to the public in this docket.

The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information in comment submissions that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS, and the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

II. Background

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the NRC is requesting public comment on its intention to request the OMB's approval for the information collection summarized below.

6. Who will be required or asked to respond: Contractors, consultants and invited NRC travelers who travel in the course of conducting business for the NRC.

7. The estimated number of annual responses: 100.

8. The estimated number of annual respondents: 100.

9. The estimated number of hours needed annually to comply with the information collection requirement or request: 100 (1 hour per form).

10. Abstract: Consultants, contractors, and those invited by the NRC to travel (e.g., prospective employees) must file travel vouchers and trip reports in order to be reimbursed for their travel expenses. The information collected includes the name, address, social security number, and the amount to be reimbursed. Travel expenses that are reimbursed are confined to those expenses essential to the transaction of official business for an approved trip.

III. Specific Requests for Comments

The NRC is seeking comments that address the following questions:

1. Is the proposed collection of information necessary for the NRC to properly perform its functions? Does the information have practical utility?

2. Is the estimate of the burden of the information collection accurate?

3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected?

4. How can the burden of the information collection on respondents be minimized, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology?

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on March 17, 2017, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

The Exchange proposes to list and trade under Nasdaq Rule 5745 (Exchange-Traded Managed Fund Shares (“NextShares”)) the common shares (“Shares”) of the exchange-traded managed funds described herein (each, a “Fund,” and collectively, the “Funds”).3

3 Except for the specific Fund information set forth below, this rule filing conforms to the rule filing, as modified by amendments 1 and 2 thereto, relating to the listing and trading on Nasdaq of the shares of 18 series of the Eaton Vance ETMF Trust and the Eaton Vance ETMF Trust II, as approved by the Commission in Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75499 (Jul. 21, 2015) (SR-NASDAQ-2015-036) and to the rule filing, as modified by amendment 1 thereto, relating to the listing and trading on Nasdaq of the shares of 5 series of the Gabelli NextShares Trust, as approved by the Commission in Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79377 (Nov. 22, 2016) (SR-NASDAQ-2016-134).

In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

The Exchange proposes to list and trade the Shares of each Fund under Nasdaq Rule 5745, which governs the listing and trading of exchange-traded managed fund shares, as defined in Nasdaq Rule 5745(c)(1), on the Exchange.4 Each Fund listed below is registered with the Commission as an open-end investment company and has filed a registration statement on Form N-1A (“Registration Statement”) with the Commission. Each Fund is a series of the Trust listed below and will be advised by an investment adviser registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Adviser”), as described below. Each Fund will be actively managed and will pursue various principal investment strategies, as noted below.5

5 Additional information regarding the Funds will be available on one of two free public Web sites (www.gabelli.com or www.nextshares.com, as indicated more fully below), as well as in the Registration Statement for the Funds.

Gabelli NextSharesTM Trust

Gabelli NextSharesTM Trust (the “Trust”) is registered with the Commission as an open-end investment company and has filed a Registration Statement with the Commission.6 Each of the following Funds is a series of the Trust.7

6See Registration Statement on Form N-1A for the Trust dated March 14, 2017 (File Nos. 333-211881 and 811-23160). The descriptions of the Funds and the Shares contained herein conform to the Registration Statement.

7 The Commission has issued an order granting the Trust and certain affiliates exemptive relief under the Investment Company Act. See Investment Company Act Release No. 31608 (May 19, 2015) (File No. 812-14438).

Gabelli Funds, LLC will be the Adviser to the Funds. The Adviser is not a registered broker-dealer, although it is affiliated with a broker-dealer. Gabelli Funds, LLC will also act as administrator to the Funds. The Adviser has implemented a fire wall with respect to its affiliated broker-dealer regarding access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to each Fund's portfolio.8 In the future event that (a) the Adviser registers as a broker-dealer or becomes newly affiliated with a broker-dealer, or (b) any new adviser or a sub-adviser to a Fund is a registered broker-dealer or becomes affiliated with a broker-dealer, it will implement a fire wall with respect to its relevant personnel and/or such broker-dealer affiliate, if applicable, regarding access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to the relevant Fund's portfolio and will be subject to procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material non-public information regarding such portfolio. G.distributors, LLC, will be the principal underwriter and distributor of the Funds' Shares. The Bank of New York Mellon will act as custodian and transfer agent. BNY Mellon Investment Servicing (US) Inc. will act as the sub-administrator to the Funds. Interactive Data Pricing and Reference Data, Inc. will be the IIV calculator to the Funds.

8 An investment adviser to an open-end fund is required to be registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”). As a result, the Adviser and its related personnel are subject to the provisions of Rule 204A-1 under the Advisers Act relating to codes of ethics. This Rule requires investment advisers to adopt a code of ethics that reflects the fiduciary nature of the relationship to clients as well as compliance with other applicable securities laws. Accordingly, procedures designed to prevent the communication and misuse of non-public information by an investment adviser must be consistent with Rule 204A-1 under the Advisers Act. In addition, Rule 206(4)-7 under the Advisers Act makes it unlawful for an investment adviser to provide investment advice to clients unless such investment adviser has (i) adopted and implemented written policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent violation, by the investment adviser and its supervised persons, of the Advisers Act and the Commission rules adopted thereunder; (ii) implemented, at a minimum, an annual review regarding the adequacy of the policies and procedures established pursuant to subparagraph (i) above and the effectiveness of their implementation; and (iii) designated an individual (who is a supervised person) responsible for administering the policies and procedures adopted under subparagraph (i) above.

Each Fund will be actively managed and will pursue the various principal investment strategies described below.9

The Gabelli Small Cap Growth Fund seeks to provide a high level of capital appreciation. Under normal market conditions, the Gabelli Small Cap Growth Fund invests at least 80% of its net assets, plus borrowings for investment purposes, in equity securities of companies that are considered to be small companies at the time the Gabelli Small Cap Growth Fund makes its investment. The Adviser currently characterizes small companies for the Gabelli Small Cap Growth Fund as those with total common stock market values of $3 billion or less at the time of investment.

b. Gabelli RBI NextSharesTM (the “Gabelli RBI Fund”)

The Gabelli RBI Fund seeks to provide above average capital appreciation. Under normal market conditions, the Gabelli RBI Fund invests in domestic and foreign services and equipment companies focused on physical asset development, including roads, bridges, and infrastructure (“RBI”). The Adviser selects companies which it believes are currently undervalued and have the potential to benefit from domestic and global reinvestment and development of physical assets, including roads, bridges, and other infrastructure-related industries.

Creations and Redemptions of Shares

Shares will be issued and redeemed on a daily basis for each Fund at the next-determined net asset value (“NAV”) 10 in specified blocks of Shares called “Creation Units.” A Creation Unit will consist of at least 25,000 Shares. Creation Units may be purchased and redeemed by or through “Authorized Participants.” 11 Purchases and sales of Shares in amounts less than a Creation Unit may be effected only in the secondary market, as described below, and not directly with a Fund.

10 As with other registered open-end investment companies, NAV generally will be calculated daily Monday through Friday as of the close of regular trading on the New York Stock Exchange, normally 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time (“E.T.”). NAV will be calculated by dividing a Fund's net asset value by the number of Shares outstanding. Information regarding the valuation of investments in calculating a Fund's NAV will be contained in the Registration Statement for its Shares.

11 “Authorized Participants” will be either: (1) “Participating parties,” i.e., brokers or other participants in the Continuous Net Settlement System (“CNS System”) of the National Securities Clearing Corporation (“NSCC”), a clearing agency registered with the Commission and affiliated with the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”), or (2) DTC participants, which in either case have executed participant agreements with the Funds' distributor and transfer agent regarding the creation and redemption of Creation Units. Investors will not have to be Authorized Participants in order to transact in Creation Units, but must place an order through and make appropriate arrangements with an Authorized Participant for such transactions.

The creation and redemption process for Funds may be effected “in kind,” in cash, or in a combination of securities and cash. Creation “in kind” means that an Authorized Participant—usually a brokerage house or large institutional investor— purchases the Creation Unit with a basket of securities equal in value to the aggregate NAV of the Shares in the Creation Unit. When an Authorized Participant redeems a Creation Unit in kind, it receives a basket of securities equal in value to the aggregate NAV of the Shares in the Creation Unit.12

12 In compliance with Nasdaq Rule 5745(b)(5), which applies to Shares based on an international or global portfolio, the Trust's application for exemptive relief under the Investment Company Act states that the Funds will comply with the federal securities laws in accepting securities for deposits and satisfying redemptions with securities, including that the securities accepted for deposits and the securities used to satisfy redemption requests are sold in transactions that would be exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (15 U.S.C. 77a).

Composition File

As defined in Nasdaq Rule 5745(c)(3), the Composition File is the specified portfolio of securities and/or cash that a Fund will accept as a deposit in issuing a Creation Unit of Shares, and the specified portfolio of securities and/or cash that a Fund will deliver in a redemption of a Creation Unit of Shares. The Composition File will be disseminated through the NSCC once each business day before the open of trading in Shares on such day and also will be made available to the public each day on a free Web site.13 Because the Funds seek to preserve the confidentiality of their current portfolio trading program, a Fund's Composition File generally will not be a pro rata reflection of the Fund's investment positions. Each security included in the Composition File will be a current holding of a Fund, but the Composition File generally will not include all of the securities in the Fund's portfolio or match the weightings of the included securities in the portfolio. Securities that the Adviser is in the process of acquiring for a Fund generally will not be represented in the Fund's Composition File until their purchase has been completed. Similarly, securities that are held in a Fund's portfolio but in the process of being sold may not be removed from its Composition File until the sale program is substantially completed. Funds creating and redeeming Shares in kind will use cash amounts to supplement the in-kind transactions to the extent necessary to ensure that Creation Units are purchased and redeemed at NAV. The Composition File also may consist entirely of cash, in which case it will not include any of the securities in a Fund's portfolio.14

13 The free Web site containing the Composition File will be www.nextshares.com.

14 In determining whether a Fund will issue or redeem Creation Units entirely on a cash basis, the key consideration will be the benefit that would accrue to the Fund and its investors. For instance, in bond transactions, the Adviser may be able to obtain better execution for a Fund than Authorized Participants because of the Adviser's size, experience and potentially stronger relationships in the fixed-income markets.

Transaction Fees

All persons purchasing or redeeming Creation Units of a Fund are expected to incur a transaction fee to cover the estimated cost to that Fund of processing the transaction, including the costs of clearance and settlement charged to it by NSCC or DTC, and the estimated trading costs (i.e., brokerage commissions, bid-ask spread, and market impact) to be incurred in converting the Composition File to or from the desired portfolio holdings. The transaction fee is determined daily and will be limited to amounts determined by the Adviser to be appropriate to defray the expenses that a Fund incurs in connection with the purchase or redemption of Creation Units.

The purpose of transaction fees is to protect a Fund's existing shareholders from the dilutive costs associated with the purchase and redemption of Creation Units. Transaction fees will differ among Funds and may vary over time for a given Fund depending on the estimated trading costs for its portfolio positions and Composition File, processing costs and other considerations. Funds that specify greater amounts of cash in their Composition File may impose higher transaction fees.

In addition, Funds that include in their Composition File instruments that clear through DTC may impose higher transaction fees than Funds with a Composition File consists [sic] solely of instruments that clear through NSCC, because DTC may charge more than NSCC in connection with Creation Unit transactions.15 The transaction fees applicable to each Fund's purchases and redemptions on a given business day will be disseminated through the NSCC prior to the open of market trading on that day and also will be made available to the public each day on a free Web site.16 In all cases, the transaction fees will be limited in accordance with the requirements of the Commission applicable to open-end management investment companies offering redeemable securities.

15 Authorized Participants that participate in the CNS System of the NSCC are expected to be able to use the enhanced NSCC/CNS process for effecting in-kind purchases and redemptions of ETFs (the “NSCC Process”) to purchase and redeem Creation Units of Funds that limit the composition of their baskets to include only NSCC Process-eligible instruments (generally domestic equity securities and cash). Because the NSCC Process is generally more efficient than the DTC clearing process, NSCC is likely to charge a Fund less than DTC to settle purchases and redemptions of Creation Units.

16 The free Web site will be www.nextshares.com.

NAV-Based Trading

Because Shares will be listed and traded on the Exchange, Shares will be available for purchase and sale on an intraday basis. Shares will be purchased and sold in the secondary market at prices directly linked to a Fund's next-determined NAV using a new trading protocol called “NAV-Based Trading.” 17 All bids, offers, and execution prices of Shares will be expressed as a premium/discount (which may be zero) to a Fund's next-determined NAV (e.g., NAV−$0.01, NAV+$0.01). A Fund's NAV will be determined each business day, normally as of 4:00 p.m., E.T. Trade executions will be binding at the time orders are matched on Nasdaq's facilities, with the transaction prices contingent upon the determination of NAV.

17 Aspects of NAV-Based Trading are protected intellectual property subject to issued and pending U.S. patents held by NextShares Solutions LLC (“NextShares Solutions”), a wholly owned subsidiary of Eaton Vance Corp. Nasdaq has entered into a license agreement with NextShares Solutions to allow for NAV-Based Trading on the Exchange of exchange-traded managed funds that have themselves entered into license agreements with NextShares Solutions.

Trading Premiums and Discounts

Bid and offer prices for Shares will be quoted throughout the day relative to NAV. The premium or discount to NAV at which Share prices are quoted and transactions are executed will vary depending on market factors, including the balance of supply and demand for Shares among investors, transaction fees, and other costs in connection with creating and redeeming Creation Units of Shares, the cost and availability of borrowing Shares, competition among market makers, the Share inventory positions and inventory strategies of market makers, the profitability requirements and business objectives of market makers, and the volume of Share trading. Reflecting such market factors, prices for Shares in the secondary market may be above, at or below NAV. Funds with higher transaction fees may trade at wider premiums or discounts to NAV than other Funds with lower transaction fees, reflecting the added costs to market makers of managing their Share inventory positions through purchases and redemptions of Creation Units.

Because making markets in Shares will be simple to manage and low risk, competition among market makers seeking to earn reliable, low-risk profits should enable the Shares to routinely trade at tight bid-ask spreads and narrow premiums/discounts to NAV. As noted below, the Funds will maintain a public Web site that will be updated on a daily basis to show current and historical trading spreads and premiums/discounts of Shares trading in the secondary market.18

18 The Web site containing this information will be www.gabelli.com.

Transmitting and Processing Orders

Member firms will utilize certain existing order types and interfaces to transmit Share bids and offers to Nasdaq, which will process Share trades like trades in shares of other listed securities.19 In the systems used to transmit and process transactions in Shares, a Fund's next-determined NAV will be represented by a proxy price (e.g., 100.00) and a premium/discount of a stated amount to the next-determined NAV to be represented by the same increment/decrement from the proxy price used to denote NAV (e.g., NAV−$0.01 would be represented as 99.99; NAV+$0.01 as 100.01).

19 As noted below, all orders to buy or sell Shares that are not executed on the day the order is submitted will be automatically cancelled as of the close of trading on such day. Prior to the commencement of trading in a Fund, the Exchange will inform its members in an Information Circular of the effect of this characteristic on existing order types.

To avoid potential investor confusion, Nasdaq will work with member firms and providers of market data services to seek to ensure that representations of intraday bids, offers, and execution prices of Shares that are made available to the investing public follow the “NAV−$0.01/NAV+$0.01” (or similar) display format. All Shares listed on the Exchange will have a unique identifier associated with their ticker symbols, which would indicate that the Shares are traded using NAV-Based Trading. Nasdaq makes available to member firms and market data services certain proprietary data feeds that are designed to supplement the market information disseminated through the consolidated tape (“Consolidated Tape”).

Specifically, the Exchange will use the NASDAQ Basic and NASDAQ Last Sale data feeds to disseminate intraday price and quote data for Shares in real time in the “NAV−$0.01/NAV+$0.01” (or similar) display format. Member firms could use the NASDAQ Basic and NASDAQ Last Sale data feeds to source intraday Share prices for presentation to the investing public in the “NAV−$0.01/NAV+$0.01” (or similar) display format.

Alternatively, member firms could source intraday Share prices in proxy price format from the Consolidated Tape and other Nasdaq data feeds (e.g., Nasdaq TotalView and Nasdaq Level 2) and use a simple algorithm to convert prices into the “NAV−$0.01/NAV+$0.01” (or similar) display format. As noted below, prior to the commencement of trading in a Fund, the Exchange will inform its members in an Information Circular of the identities of the specific Nasdaq data feeds from which intraday Share prices in proxy price format may be obtained.

Intraday Reporting of Quotes and Trades

All bids and offers for Shares and all Share trade executions will be reported intraday in real time by the Exchange to the Consolidated Tape 20 and separately disseminated to member firms and market data services through the Exchange data feeds listed above. The Exchange will also provide the member firms participating in each Share trade with a contemporaneous notice of trade execution, indicating the number of Shares bought or sold and the executed premium/discount to NAV.21

20 Due to systems limitations, the Consolidated Tape will report intraday execution prices and quotes for Shares using a proxy price format. As noted, Nasdaq will separately report real-time execution prices and quotes to member firms and providers of market data services in the “NAV−$0.01/NAV+$0.01” (or similar) display format, and otherwise seek to ensure that representations of intraday bids, offers and execution prices for Shares that are made available to the investing public follow the same display format.

21 All orders to buy or sell Shares that are not executed on the day the order is submitted will be automatically cancelled as of the close of trading on such day.

Final Trade Pricing, Reporting, and Settlement

All executed Share trades will be recorded and stored intraday by Nasdaq to await the calculation of such Fund's end-of- day NAV and the determination of final trade pricing. After a Fund's NAV is calculated and provided to the Exchange, Nasdaq will price each Share trade entered into during the day at the Fund's NAV plus/minus the trade's executed premium/discount. Using the final trade price, each executed Share trade will then be disseminated to member firms and market data services via an FTP file to be created for exchange-traded managed funds and confirmed to the member firms participating in the trade to supplement the previously provided information to include final pricing.22 After the pricing is finalized, Nasdaq will deliver the Share trading data to NSCC for clearance and settlement, following the same processes used for the clearance and settlement of trades in other exchange-traded securities.

22 File Transfer Protocol (“FTP”) is a standard network protocol used to transfer computer files on the Internet. Nasdaq will arrange for the daily dissemination of an FTP file with executed Share trades to member firms and market data services.

Availability of Information

Prior to the commencement of market trading in Shares, the Funds will be required to establish and maintain a public Web site through which its current prospectus may be downloaded.23 In addition, a separate Web site (www.nextshares.com) will include additional information concerning the Funds updated on a daily basis, including the prior business day's NAV, and the following trading information for such business day expressed as premiums/discounts to NAV: (a) Intraday high, low, average, and closing prices of Shares in Exchange trading; (b) the midpoint of the highest bid and lowest offer prices as of the close of Exchange trading, expressed as a premium/discount to NAV (the “Closing Bid/Ask Midpoint”); and (c) the spread between highest bid and lowest offer prices as of the close of Exchange trading (the “Closing Bid/Ask Spread.”). The www.nextshares.com Web site will also contain charts showing the frequency distribution and range of values of trading prices, Closing Bid/Ask Midpoints, and Closing Bid/Ask Spreads over time.

23See footnote 18.

The Composition File will be disseminated through the NSCC before the open of trading in Shares on each business day and also will be made available to the public each day on a free Web site as noted above.24 Consistent with the disclosure requirements that apply to traditional open-end investment companies, a complete list of current Fund portfolio positions will be made available at least once each calendar quarter, with a reporting lag of not more than 60 days. Funds may provide more frequent disclosures of portfolio positions at their discretion.

24See footnote 13.

Reports of Share transactions will be disseminated to the market and delivered to the member firms participating in the trade contemporaneous with execution. Once a Fund's daily NAV has been calculated and disseminated, Nasdaq will price each Share trade entered into during the day at the Fund's NAV plus/minus the trade's executed premium/discount. Using the final trade price, each executed Share trade will then be disseminated to member firms and market data services via an FTP file to be created for exchange-traded managed funds and confirmed to the member firms participating in the trade to supplement the previously provided information to include final pricing.

Information regarding NAV-based trading prices, best bids and offers for Shares, and volume of Shares traded will be continuously available on a real-time basis throughout each trading day on brokers' computer screens and other electronic services.

Initial and Continued Listing

Shares will conform to the initial and continued listing criteria as set forth under Nasdaq Rule 5745. A minimum of 50,000 Shares and no less than two Creation Units of each Fund will be outstanding at the commencement of trading on the Exchange. The Exchange will obtain a representation from the issuer of the Shares that the NAV per Share will be calculated daily (on each business day that the New York Stock Exchange is open for trading) and provided to Nasdaq via the Mutual Fund Quotation Service (“MFQS”) by the fund accounting agent. As soon as the NAV is entered into MFQS, Nasdaq will disseminate the value to market participants and market data vendors via the Mutual Fund Dissemination Service (“MFDS”) so all firms will receive the NAV per share at the same time. The Reporting Authority 25 also will ensure that the Composition File will implement and maintain, or be subject to, procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material non-public information regarding each Fund's portfolio positions and changes in the positions.

25See Nasdaq Rule 5745(c)(4).

For each Fund, an estimated value of an individual Share, defined in Nasdaq Rule 5745(c)(2) as the “Intraday Indicative Value,” will be calculated and disseminated at intervals of not more than 15 minutes throughout the Regular Market Session 26 when Shares trade on the Exchange. The Exchange will obtain a representation from the issuer of the Shares that the IIV will be calculated on an intraday basis and provided to Nasdaq for dissemination via the Nasdaq Global Index Service (“GIDS”).

The IIV will be based on current information regarding the value of the securities and other assets held by a Fund.27 The purpose of the IIVs is to enable investors to estimate the next-determined NAV so they can determine the number of Shares to buy or sell if they want to transact in an approximate dollar amount (e.g., if an investor wants to acquire approximately $5,000 of a Fund, how many Shares should the investor buy?).28

27 IIVs disseminated throughout each trading day would be based on the same portfolio as used to calculate that day's NAV. Funds will reflect purchases and sales of portfolio positions in their NAV the next business day after trades are executed.

28 Because, in NAV-Based Trading, prices of executed trades are not determined until the reference NAV is calculated, buyers and sellers of Shares during the trading day will not know the final value of their purchases and sales until the end of the trading day. A Fund's Registration Statement, Web site and any advertising or marketing materials will include prominent disclosure of this fact. Although IIVs may provide useful estimates of the value of intraday trades, they cannot be used to calculate with precision the dollar value of the Shares to be bought or sold.

The Adviser is not a registered broker-dealer, although it is affiliated with a broker-dealer. The Adviser has implemented a fire wall with respect to its broker-dealer affiliate regarding access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to each Fund's portfolio. In the future event that (a) the Adviser registers as a broker-dealer or becomes newly affiliated with a broker-dealer, or (b) any new adviser or a sub-adviser to a Fund is a registered broker-dealer or becomes affiliated with a broker-dealer, it will implement a fire wall with respect to its relevant personnel and/or such broker-dealer affiliate, if applicable, regarding access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to the relevant Fund's portfolio and will be subject to procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material non-public information regarding such portfolio.

Trading Halts

The Exchange may consider all relevant factors in exercising its discretion to halt or suspend trading in Shares. Nasdaq will halt trading in Shares under the conditions specified in Nasdaq Rule 4120 and in Nasdaq Rule 5745(d)(2)(C). Additionally, Nasdaq may cease trading Shares if other unusual conditions or circumstances exist which, in the opinion of Nasdaq, make further dealings on Nasdaq detrimental to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market. To manage the risk of a non-regulatory Share trading halt, Nasdaq has in place back-up processes and procedures to ensure orderly trading. Because, in NAV-Based Trading, all trade execution prices are linked to end-of-day NAV, buyers and sellers of Shares should be less exposed to risk of loss due to intraday trading halts than buyers and sellers of conventional exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”) and other exchange-traded securities.

Trading Rules

Nasdaq deems Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in Shares to be subject to Nasdaq's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities. Nasdaq will allow trading in Shares from 9:30 a.m. until 4:00 p.m. E.T.

Every order to trade Shares of the Funds is subject to the proxy price protection threshold of plus/minus $1.00, which determines the lower and upper threshold for the life of the order and whereby the order will be cancelled at any point if it exceeds $101.00 or falls below $99.00, the established thresholds.29 With certain exceptions, each order also must contain the applicable order attributes, including routing instructions and time-in-force information, as described in Nasdaq Rule 4703.30

29See Nasdaq Rule 5745(h).

30See Nasdaq Rule 5745(b)(6).

Surveillance

The Exchange represents that trading in Shares will be subject to the existing trading surveillances, administered by both Nasdaq and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) on behalf of the Exchange, which are designed to detect violations of Exchange rules and applicable federal securities laws.31 The Exchange represents that these procedures are adequate to properly monitor trading of Shares on the Exchange and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and applicable federal securities laws.

31 FINRA provides surveillance of trading on the Exchange pursuant to a regulatory services agreement. The Exchange is responsible for FINRA's performance under this regulatory services agreement.

The surveillances referred to above generally focus on detecting securities trading outside their normal patterns, which could be indicative of manipulative or other violative activity. When such situations are detected, surveillance analysis follows and investigations are opened, where appropriate, to review the behavior of all relevant parties for all relevant trading violations.

FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, will communicate as needed with other markets and other entities that are members of the Intermarket Surveillance Group (“ISG”) 32 regarding trading in Shares, and in exchange-traded securities and instruments held by the Funds (to the extent such exchange-traded securities and instruments are known through the publication of the Composition File and periodic public disclosures of a Fund's portfolio holdings), and FINRA may obtain trading information regarding such trading from other markets and other entities.

32 For a list of the current members of ISG, see www.isgportal.org. The Exchange notes that not all components of a Fund's portfolio may trade on markets that are members of ISG or with which the Exchange has in place a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement.

In addition, the Exchange may obtain information regarding trading in Shares, and in exchange-traded securities and instruments held by the Funds (to the extent such exchange-traded securities and instruments are known through the publication of the Composition File and periodic public disclosures of a Fund's portfolio holdings), from markets and other entities that are members of ISG, which includes securities and futures exchanges, or with which the Exchange has in place a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement.

In addition, the Exchange also has a general policy prohibiting the distribution of material non-public information by its employees.

Information Circular

Prior to the commencement of trading in a Fund, the Exchange will inform its members in an Information Circular of the special characteristics and risks associated with trading the Shares. Specifically, the Information Circular will discuss the following: (1) The procedures for purchases and redemptions of Shares in Creation Units (and noting that Shares are not individually redeemable); (2) Nasdaq Rule 2111A, which imposes suitability obligations on Nasdaq members with respect to recommending transactions in Shares to customers; (3) how information regarding the IIV and Composition File is disseminated; (4) the requirement that members deliver a prospectus to investors purchasing Shares prior to or concurrently with the confirmation of a transaction; and (5) information regarding NAV-Based Trading protocols.

As noted above, all orders to buy or sell Shares that are not executed on the day the order is submitted will be automatically cancelled as of the close of trading on such day. The Information Circular will discuss the effect of this characteristic on existing order types. The Information Circular also will identify the specific Nasdaq data feeds from which intraday Share prices in proxy price format may be obtained.

In addition, the Information Circular will advise members, prior to the commencement of trading, of the prospectus delivery requirements applicable to the Funds. Members purchasing Shares from a Fund for resale to investors will deliver a summary prospectus to such investors. The Information Circular will also discuss any exemptive, no-action and interpretive relief granted by the Commission from any rules under the Act.

The Information Circular also will reference that the Funds are subject to various fees and expenses described in the Registration Statements. The Information Circular will also disclose the trading hours of the Shares and the applicable NAV calculation time for the Shares. The Information Circular will disclose that information about the Shares will be publicly available at www.nextshares.com.

Information regarding the Funds' trading protocols will be disseminated to Nasdaq members in accordance with current processes for newly listed products. Nasdaq intends to provide its members with a detailed explanation of NAV-Based Trading through a Trading Alert issued prior to the commencement of trading in Shares on the Exchange.

Continued Listing Representations

All statements and representations made in this filing regarding (a) the description of the Funds' portfolios, (b) limitations on portfolio holdings or reference assets, or (c) the applicability of Exchange rules and surveillance procedures shall constitute continued listing requirements for listing the Shares of the Funds on the Exchange. The issuer has represented to the Exchange that it will advise the Exchange of any failure by any Fund to comply with the continued listing requirements, and, pursuant to its obligations under Section 19(g)(1) of the Act, the Exchange will monitor for compliance with the continued listing requirements. If a Fund is not in compliance with the applicable listing requirements, the Exchange will commence delisting procedures under Nasdaq Rule 5800, et seq.

2. Statutory Basis

Nasdaq believes that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,33 in general, and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,34 in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system.

33 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

34 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices in that the Shares would be listed and traded on the Exchange pursuant to the initial and continued listing criteria in Nasdaq Rule 5745. The Exchange believes that its surveillance procedures are adequate to properly monitor the trading of Shares on Nasdaq and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and the applicable federal securities laws. The Adviser is not registered as a broker-dealer, but it is affiliated with a broker-dealer. The Adviser has implemented a “fire wall” between the Adviser and its broker-dealer affiliate with respect to access to information concerning the composition and/or changes to each Fund's portfolio holdings. The Exchange may obtain information via ISG from other exchanges that are members of ISG or with which the Exchange has entered into a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement, to the extent necessary.

The proposed rule change is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade and to protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange will obtain a representation from each issuer of Shares that the NAV per Share will be calculated on each business day that the New York Stock Exchange is open for trading and that the NAV will be made available to all market participants at the same time. In addition, a large amount of information would be publicly available regarding the Funds and the Shares, thereby promoting market transparency.

Prior to the commencement of market trading in Shares, the Funds will be required to establish and maintain a public Web site through which its current prospectus may be downloaded.35 In addition, a separate Web site (www.nextshares.com) will display additional information concerning the Funds updated on a daily basis, including the prior business day's NAV, and the following trading information for such business day expressed as premiums/discounts to NAV: (a) Intraday high, low, average and closing prices of Shares in Exchange trading; (b) the Closing Bid/Ask Midpoint; and (c) the Closing Bid/Ask Spread.

35See footnote 18.

The www.nextshares.com Web site will also contain charts showing the frequency distribution and range of values of trading prices, Closing Bid/Ask Midpoints, and Closing Bid/Ask Spreads over time. The Composition File will be disseminated through the NSCC before the open of trading in Shares on each business day and also will be made available to the public each day on a free Web site, as noted above.36 The Exchange will obtain a representation from the issuer of the Shares that the IIV will be calculated and disseminated on an intraday basis at intervals of not more than 15 minutes during trading on the Exchange and provided to Nasdaq for dissemination via GIDS. A complete list of current portfolio positions for the Funds will be made available at least once each calendar quarter, with a reporting lag of not more than 60 days. Funds may provide more frequent disclosures of portfolio positions at their discretion.

36See footnote 13.

Transactions in Shares will be reported to the Consolidated Tape at the time of execution in proxy price format and will be disseminated to member firms and market data services through Nasdaq's trading service and market data interfaces, as defined above. Once each Fund's daily NAV has been calculated and the final price of its intraday Share trades has been determined, Nasdaq will deliver a confirmation with final pricing to the transacting parties. At the end of the day, Nasdaq will also post a newly created FTP file with the final transaction data for the trading and market data services.

The Exchange expects that information regarding NAV-based trading prices and volumes of Shares traded will be continuously available on a real-time basis throughout each trading day on brokers' computer screens and other electronic services. Because Shares will trade at prices based on the next-determined NAV, investors will be able to buy and sell individual Shares at a known premium or discount to NAV that they can limit by using limit orders at the time of order entry. Trading in Shares will be subject to Nasdaq Rules 5745(d)(2)(B) and (C), which provide for the suspension of trading or trading halts under certain circumstances, including if, in the view of the Exchange, trading in Shares becomes inadvisable.

The proposed rule change is designed to perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest in that it will facilitate the listing and trading of the Funds, which seek to provide investors with access to a broad range of actively managed investment strategies in a structure that offers the cost and tax efficiencies and shareholder protections of ETFs, while removing the requirement for daily portfolio holdings disclosure to ensure a tight relationship between market trading prices and NAV.

For the above reasons, Nasdaq believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In fact, the Exchange believes that the introduction of the Funds would promote competition by making available to investors a broad range of actively managed investment strategies in a structure that offers the cost and tax efficiencies and shareholder protections of ETFs, while removing the requirement for daily portfolio holdings disclosure to ensure a tight relationship between market trading prices and NAV. Moreover, the Exchange believes that the proposed method of Share trading would provide investors with transparency of trading costs, and the ability to control trading costs using limit orders, that is not available for conventionally traded ETFs.

These developments could significantly enhance competition to the benefit of the markets and investors.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

No written comments were either solicited or received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will: (a) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change; or (b) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

• Send an email to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include File Number SR-NASDAQ-2017-029 on the subject line.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2017-029. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2017-029 and should be submitted on or before April 21, 2017.

For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.37

37 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

Eduardo A. Aleman,Assistant Secretary.[FR Doc. 2017-06333 Filed 3-30-17; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 8011-01-PSECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION[Release No. 34-80313; File No. SR-NYSE-2017-12]Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Section 102.01B of the NYSE Listed Company Manual To Modify the Requirements That Apply to Companies That List Without a Prior Exchange Act Registration and That Are Not Listing in Connection With an Underwritten Initial Public OfferingMarch 27, 2017.

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) 2 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,3 notice is hereby given that, on March 13, 2017, New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE” or the “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

2 15 U.S.C. 78a.

3 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

The Exchange proposes to amend Section 102.01B of the NYSE Listed Company Manual (the “Manual”) to modify the provisions relating to the qualification of companies listing without a prior Exchange Act registration. The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.

The Exchange proposes to amend Section 102.01B of the Manual to modify the provisions relating to the qualification of companies listing without a prior Exchange Act registration.

Generally, the Exchange expects to list companies in connection with a firm commitment underwritten IPO, upon transfer from another market, or pursuant to a spin-off. Companies listing in connection with an IPO must demonstrate that they have $40 million in market value of publicly-held shares, while companies that are listing upon transfer from another exchange or the over-the counter market or pursuant to a spin-off must demonstrate that they have $100 million in market value of publicly-held shares.

Section 102.01B currently recognizes that some companies that have not previously had their common equity securities registered under the Exchange Act, but which have sold common equity securities in a private placement, may wish to list their common equity securities on the Exchange at the time of effectiveness of a registration statement filed solely for the purpose of allowing existing shareholders to sell their shares.4 Footnote (E) of Section 102.01B provides that the Exchange will, on a case by case basis, exercise discretion to list such companies. In exercising this discretion, Footnote (E) provides that the Exchange will determine that such company has met the $100 million aggregate market value of publicly-held shares requirement based on a combination of both (i) an independent third-party valuation (a “Valuation”) of the company and (ii) the most recent trading price for the company's common stock in a trading system for unregistered securities operated by a national securities exchange or a registered broker-dealer (a “Private Placement Market”). The Exchange will attribute a market value of publicly-held shares to the company equal to the lesser of (i) the value calculable based on the Valuation and (ii) the value calculable based on the most recent trading price in a Private Placement Market.

4See NYSE Listed Company Manual, Section 102.01B, Footnote (E).

Any Valuation used for purposes of Footnote (E) must be provided by an entity that has significant experience and demonstrable competence in the provision of such valuations. The Valuation must be of a recent date as of the time of the approval of the company for listing and the evaluator must have considered, among other factors, the annual financial statements required to be included in the registration statement, along with financial statements for any completed fiscal quarters subsequent to the end of the last year of audited financials included in the registration statement. The Exchange will consider any market factors or factors particular to the listing applicant that would cause concern that the value of the company had diminished since the date of the Valuation and will continue to monitor the company and the appropriateness of relying on the Valuation up to the time of listing. In particular, the Exchange will examine the trading price trends for the stock in the Private Placement Market over a period of several months prior to listing and will only rely on a Private Placement Market price if it is consistent with a sustained history over that several month period evidencing a market value in excess of the Exchange's market value requirement. The Exchange may withdraw its approval of the listing at any time prior to the listing date if it believes that the Valuation no longer accurately reflects the company's likely market value.

While Footnote (E) to Section 102.01B provides for a company listing upon effectiveness of a selling shareholder registration statement, it does not make any provision for a company listing in connection with the effectiveness of an Exchange Act registration statement in the absence of an IPO or other Securities Act registration. A company is able to become an Exchange Act registrant without a concurrent public offering by filing a Form 10 or an annual report (such as a Form 10-K or Form 20-F) with the SEC. The Exchange believes that it is appropriate to list companies immediately upon effectiveness of an Exchange Act registration statement without a concurrent Securities Act registration provided the applicable company meets all other listing requirements. Consequently, the Exchange proposes to amend Footnote (E) to Section 102.01B to explicitly provide that it applies to companies listing upon effectiveness of an Exchange Act registration statement without a concurrent Securities Act registration, as well as to companies listing upon effectiveness of a selling shareholder registration statement.

The Exchange notes that the requirement of Footnote (E) that the Exchange rely on recent Private Placement Market trading in addition to a Valuation may cause difficulties for certain companies that are otherwise clearly qualified for listing. Some companies that are clearly large enough to be suitable for listing on the Exchange do not have their securities traded at all on a Private Placement Market prior to going public. In other cases, the Private Placement Market trading is too limited to provide a reasonable basis for reaching conclusions about a company's qualification. Consequently, the Exchange proposes to amend Footnote (E) to provide an exception to the Private Placement Market trading requirement for companies with respect to which there is a recent Valuation available indicating at least $250 million in market value of publicly-held shares. A Valuation of at least two-and-a-half times the $100 million requirement provides a basis for concluding that the market value of the company's shares would meet the Valuation standard upon commencement of trading on the Exchange. In addition, the Exchange notes that any Valuation used for this purpose must be provided by an entity that has significant experience and demonstrable competence in the provision of such valuations.

2. Statutory Basis

The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) 5 of the Act, in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,6 in particular in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. The proposed rule change would foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in clearing and settling transactions in securities, thereby facilitating such transactions.

5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

The proposal to permit companies listing upon effectiveness of an Exchange Act registration statement without a concurrent public offering or Securities Act registration is designed to protect investors and the public interest, because such companies would be required to meet all of the same quantitative requirements met by other listing applicants. The proposal to amend Footnote (E) to Section 102.01B to allow companies to avail themselves of that provision without any reliance on Private Placement Market trading is designed to protect investors and the public interest because any company relying solely on a valuation to demonstrate compliance with the market value of publicly-held shares requirement would be required to demonstrate a market value of publicly-held shares of $250 million, rather than the $100 million that is generally applicable.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Exchange Act. Rather, the proposed rule change would increase competition for new listings by enabling companies to list that meet all quantitative requirements but are currently unable to list because of the methodology required by the currents rules to demonstrate their compliance.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register or up to 90 days (i) as the Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:

(A) By order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, or

(B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

• Send an email to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include File Number SR-NYSE-2017-12 on the subject line.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2017-12. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2017-12 and should be submitted on or before April 21, 2017.

For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.7

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on March 21, 2017, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (“ISE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. ISE filed the proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.4 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).

4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

The Exchange proposes to delay the implementation of functionality associated with Stock-Option Orders 5 in connection with a system migration to Nasdaq INET technology.

5 A stock-option order is an order to buy or sell a stated number of units of an underlying stock or a security convertible into the underlying stock (“convertible security”) coupled with the purchase or sale of options contract(s) on the opposite side of the market representing either (A) the same number of units of the underlying stock or convertible security, or (B) the number of units of the underlying stock necessary to create a delta neutral position, but in no case in a ratio greater than eight-to-one (8.00), where the ratio represents the total number of units of the underlying stock or convertible security in the option leg to the total number of units of the underlying stock or convertible security in the stock leg. See ISE Rule 722(a)(2).

The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at www.ise.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

Today, ISE accepts complex orders, including Stock-Option Orders that contain a stock component. Today, complex orders, including Stock-Option Orders, are permitted to: (1) Leg into the regular market where they may trade against bids and offers for the individual legs pursuant to Rule 722(b)(3)(ii) and (iii) (“legging”); 6 or (2) execute against another order within the complex order book.

The Exchange proposes to delay the implementation of legging functionality for Stock-Option Orders in connection with a migration to the INET platform. INET is the proprietary core technology utilized across Nasdaq's global markets and utilized on The NASDAQ Options Market LLC (“NOM”), NASDAQ PHLX LLC (“Phlx”) and NASDAQ BX, Inc. (“BX”) (collectively, “Nasdaq Exchanges”). The migration of ISE to the Nasdaq INET architecture would result in higher performance, scalability, and more robust architecture. With this system migration, the Exchange intends to adopt certain trading functionality currently utilized at Nasdaq Exchanges.7

The Exchange desires to delay the implementation of the legging functionality for Stock-Option Orders on INET at this time and rollout this functionality within one year of the date of the filing of this proposal. The Exchange is staging the re-platform to provide maximum benefit to its Members while also ensuring a successful rollout. This delay in implementing the legging functionality for Stock-Option Orders will provide the Exchange additional time to test and implement this functionality on the INET platform.

The Exchange filed a proposal to begin a system migration to Nasdaq INET in Q2 of 2017.8 The migration will be on a symbol by symbol basis as specified by the Exchange in a notice to Members.9 The Exchange is proposing to implement this rule change on the INET platform as the symbols migrate to that platform. The legging functionality for Stock-Option Orders will be available until the symbol migrates to the INET platform. Once the symbol migrates to INET the legging functionality for Stock-Option Orders will not be available. However, Stock-Option Orders will continue to be executed against other Stock-Option Orders in the complex order book. The Exchange will issue an Options Trader Alert to all Members notifying them that legging functionality for Stock-Option Orders will no longer be available with the symbol migration to INET. The Exchange proposes to launch the legging functionality on the INET platform within one year from the date of filing of this rule change to be announced in an Options Trader Alert.

8Id. This proposal is not approved.

9 The Exchange will issue an Options Trader Alert prior to the migration and will specify the dates that symbols will migrate to the INET platform.

2. Statutory Basis

The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,10 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,11 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public interest because the Exchange desires to rollout the legging functionality for Stock-Option Orders at a later date to allow additional time to rebuild this technology on the new platform.

10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

By delaying the implementation of functionality with the symbol migration to INET, the Exchange will have additional time to test and implement this functionality. The Exchange will provide Members with ample notice of the turn-off of this functionality and note within that notice that Stock-Option Orders will continue to be executed against other Stock-Option Orders. The Exchange will continue to provide notifications to Members to ensure clarity about the availability of this functionality with the symbol migration. The Exchange will issue an Options Trader Alert indicating when the legging functionality will become available on the INET platform.

The Exchange does not anticipate any significant impact with respect to execution quality. The priority rules will continue to apply with respect to these Stock-Option Orders respecting Priority Customer Orders.12 The Exchange notes that Phlx does not offer legging functionality for Stock-Option Orders.13

12See ISE Rule 722(b)(2).

13See Phlx Rule 1098.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impact the intense competition that exists in the options market. Members will be able to continue to execute complex orders on ISE, except that Stock-Option Orders will only be permitted to trade with other Stock-Option Orders in the complex order book as the symbol migrates to INET. The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on intra-market competition because all Members uniformly will only be permitted to trade with other Stock-Option Orders in the complex order book as the symbol migrates to INET.

The Exchange proposes to launch the legging functionality on the INET platform within one year from the date of filing of this rule change to be announced in an Options Trader Alert.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

No written comments were either solicited or received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 14 and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.15

14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).

15 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.

At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

• Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

• Send an email to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include File Number SR-ISE-2017-28 on the subject line.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2017-28. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2017-28 and should be submitted on or before April 21, 2017.

For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.16

The Small Business Administration (SBA) is publishing this notice to comply with requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), which requires agencies to submit proposed reporting and recordkeeping requirements to OMB for review and approval, and to publish a notice in the Federal Register notifying the public that the agency has made such a submission. This notice also allows an additional 30 days for public comments.

DATES:

Submit comments on or before May 1, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

Comments should refer to the information collection by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: Agency Clearance Officer, Curtis Rich, Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20416; and SBA Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.

Copies: A copy of the Form OMB 83-1, supporting statement, and other documents submitted to OMB for review may be obtained from the Agency Clearance Officer.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This revised information collection is submitted to SBA by lenders that are applying for participation in SBA's Community Advantage Pilot Program. SBA uses the information to evaluate the lenders eligibility and qualifications for participation in the pilot program.

Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), E.O. 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 257-1 of December 11, 2015), I hereby determine that an object to be included in the exhibition “The Philosophy Chamber: Art and Science in Harvard's Teaching Cabinet, 1766-1820,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, is of cultural significance. The object is imported pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit object at the Harvard Art Museums, Cambridge, Massachusetts, from on or about May 19, 2017, until on or about December 31, 2017, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these Determinations be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For further information, including an object list, contact the Office of Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs in the Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; email: section2459@state.gov). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, L/PD, SA-5, Suite 5H03, Washington, DC 20522-0505.

The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Currently, the IRS is soliciting comments concerning Form 13560, Health Plan Administrator (HPA) Return of Funds.

DATES:

Written comments should be received on or before May 30, 2017 to be assured of consideration.

Abstract: Form 13560 is completed by Health Plan Administrators (HPAs) and accompanies a return of funds in order to ensure proper handling. This form serves as supporting documentation for any funds returned by an HPA and clarifies where the payment should be applied and why it is being sent.

Current Actions: There is no change in the paperwork burden previously approved by OMB. This form is being submitted for renewal purposes only.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Affected Public: Business or other for-profit organizations.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 200.

Estimated Time per Respondent: 15 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 50.

The following paragraph applies to all of the collections of information covered by this notice:

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103.

Request for Comments: Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information.

The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Assistance Center Improvements Project Committee will conduct an open meeting and will solicit public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

DATES:

The meeting will be held Tuesday, April 18, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lisa Billups at 1-888-912-1227 or (214) 413-6523.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that a meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Taxpayer Assistance Center Improvements Project Committee will be held Tuesday, April 18, 2017, at 3:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate must be made with Lisa Billups. For more information please contact Lisa Billups at 1-888-912-1227 or 214-413-6523, or write TAP Office 1114 Commerce Street, Dallas, TX 75242-1021, or post comments to the Web site: http://www.improveirs.org.

The committee will be discussing various issues related to the Taxpayer Assistance Centers and public input is welcomed.

In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, this notice announces that the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), Department of Veterans Affairs, will submit the collection of information abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The PRA submission describes the nature of the information collection and its expected cost and burden; it includes the actual data collection instrument.

DATES:

Comments must be submitted on or before May 1, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

Submit written comments on the collection of information through www.Regulations.gov, or to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attn: VA Desk Officer; 725 17th St. NW., Washington, DC 20503 or sent through electronic mail to oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. Please refer to “OMB Control No. 2900-0045” in any correspondence.

Abstract: Internet based. WebLGY automatically generates an appraisal request on VA Form 26-1805-1 for the requester. The requester, usually a lender or agent, following the prompts in the computer system inputs the required information. Upon completion, the requester enters “submit” and VA Form 26-1805-1 is generated which contains the case number, appraiser assignment, and property information which is automatically emailed to the appraiser and requester.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments on this collection of information was published at 82 FR 16, page 8564-8565 on Thursday, January 26, 2017.

In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, this notice announces that the Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, will submit the collection of information abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The PRA submission describes the nature of the information collection and its expected cost and burden and it includes the actual data collection instrument.

DATES:

Comments must be submitted on or before May 1, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

Submit written comments on the collection of information through www.Regulations.gov, or to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attn: VA Desk Officer; 725 17th St. NW., Washington, DC 20503 or sent through electronic mail to oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. Please refer to “OMB Control No. 2900-0802” in any correspondence.

The Office of Information and Technology (IT), Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information used by the agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, Federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed revision of a currently approved collection, and allow 60 days for public comment in response to this notice. This notice solicits comments for information needed from service organizations requesting to be placed on VA's mailing lists for specific publications; to request additional information from the correspondent to identify a veteran; to request for and consent to release of information from claimant's records to a third party; and to determine an applicant's eligibility to receive a list of names and addresses of Veterans and their dependents.

DATES:

Written comments and recommendations on the proposed collection of information should be received on or before May 30, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

Submit written comments on the collection of information through Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at www.Regulations.gov or to Martin L. Hill, Office of Information and Technology (005R1B), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20420 or email: martin.hill@va.gov. Please refer to “2900-0028” in any correspondence. During the comment period, comments may be viewed online through the FDMS.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Martin L. Hill at (202) 632-7452.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Under the PRA of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13; 44 U.S.C. 3501-21), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. This request for comment is being made pursuant to Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA.

With respect to the following collection of information, IT invites comments on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of IT's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of IT's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or the use of other forms of information technology.

Titles:

a. Application of Service Representative for Placement on Mailing List, VA Form 3215.

b. Request for and Consent to Release of Information from Claimant's Records, VA Form 3288.

Type of Review: Extension without change of a currently approved collection.

Abstract:

a. VA operates an outreach services program to ensure Veterans and beneficiaries have information about benefits and services to which they may be entitled. To support the program, VA distributes copies of publications to Veterans Service Organizations' representatives to be used in rendering services and representation of veterans, their spouses and dependents. Service organizations complete VA Form 3215 to request placement on a mailing list for specific VA publications.

b. Veterans or beneficiaries complete VA Form 3288 to provide VA with a written consent to release his or her records or information to third parties such as insurance companies, physicians and other individuals.

c. VA Form Letter 70-2 is used to obtain additional information from a correspondent when the incoming correspondence does not provide sufficient information to identify a Veteran. VA personnel use the information to identify the Veteran, determine the location of a specific file, and to accomplish the action requested by the correspondent such as processing a benefit claim or file material in the individual's claims folder.

d. Title 38 U.S.C. 5701(f)(1) authorized the disclosure of names or addresses, or both of present or former members of the Armed Forces and/or their beneficiaries to nonprofit organizations (including members of Congress) to notify Veterans of Title 38 benefits and to provide assistance to Veterans in obtaining these benefits. This release includes VA's Outreach Program for the purpose of advising Veterans of non-VA Federal State and local benefits and programs.

Affected Public: Individuals or households, Not for profit institutions, and State, local or tribal government.

Estimated Annual Burden:

a. Application of Service Representative for Placement on Mailing List, VA Form 3215—25 hours.

b. Request for and Consent to Release of Information From Claimant's Records, VA Form 3288—18,875 hours.

Cynthia Harvey-Pryor,Department Clearance Officer, Office of Privacy and Records Management, Department of Veterans Affairs.[FR Doc. 2017-06350 Filed 3-30-17; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 8320-01-P8261Friday, March 31, 2017Presidential DocumentsPart IIThe PresidentExecutive Order 13783—Promoting Energy Independence and Economic GrowthNotice of March 29, 2017—Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to Significant Malicious Cyber-Enabled ActivitiesTitle 3—The PresidentExecutive Order 13783 of March 28, 2017Promoting Energy Independence and Economic GrowthBy the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:Section 1. Policy. (a) It is in the national interest to promote clean and safe development of our Nation's vast energy resources, while at the same time avoiding regulatory burdens that unnecessarily encumber energy production, constrain economic growth, and prevent job creation. Moreover, the prudent development of these natural resources is essential to ensuring the Nation's geopolitical security.

(b) It is further in the national interest to ensure that the Nation's electricity is affordable, reliable, safe, secure, and clean, and that it can be produced from coal, natural gas, nuclear material, flowing water, and other domestic sources, including renewable sources.

(c) Accordingly, it is the policy of the United States that executive departments and agencies (agencies) immediately review existing regulations that potentially burden the development or use of domestically produced energy resources and appropriately suspend, revise, or rescind those that unduly burden the development of domestic energy resources beyond the degree necessary to protect the public interest or otherwise comply with the law.

(d) It further is the policy of the United States that, to the extent permitted by law, all agencies should take appropriate actions to promote clean air and clean water for the American people, while also respecting the proper roles of the Congress and the States concerning these matters in our constitutional republic.

(e) It is also the policy of the United States that necessary and appropriate environmental regulations comply with the law, are of greater benefit than cost, when permissible, achieve environmental improvements for the American people, and are developed through transparent processes that employ the best available peer-reviewed science and economics.

Sec. 2. Immediate Review of All Agency Actions that Potentially Burden the Safe, Efficient Development of Domestic Energy Resources. (a) The heads of agencies shall review all existing regulations, orders, guidance documents, policies, and any other similar agency actions (collectively, agency actions) that potentially burden the development or use of domestically produced energy resources, with particular attention to oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy resources. Such review shall not include agency actions that are mandated by law, necessary for the public interest, and consistent with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.

(b) For purposes of this order, “burden” means to unnecessarily obstruct, delay, curtail, or otherwise impose significant costs on the siting, permitting, production, utilization, transmission, or delivery of energy resources.

(c) Within 45 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency with agency actions described in subsection (a) of this section shall develop and submit to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB Director) a plan to carry out the review required by subsection (a) of this section. The plans shall also be sent to the Vice President, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, and the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality. The head of any agency who determines that such agency does not have agency actions described in subsection (a) of this section shall submit to the OMB Director a written statement to that effect and, absent a determination by the OMB Director that such agency does have agency actions described in subsection (a) of this section, shall have no further responsibilities under this section.

(d) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency shall submit a draft final report detailing the agency actions described in subsection (a) of this section to the Vice President, the OMB Director, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, and the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality. The report shall include specific recommendations that, to the extent permitted by law, could alleviate or eliminate aspects of agency actions that burden domestic energy production.

(e) The report shall be finalized within 180 days of the date of this order, unless the OMB Director, in consultation with the other officials who receive the draft final reports, extends that deadline.

(f) The OMB Director, in consultation with the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, shall be responsible for coordinating the recommended actions included in the agency final reports within the Executive Office of the President.

(g) With respect to any agency action for which specific recommendations are made in a final report pursuant to subsection (e) of this section, the head of the relevant agency shall, as soon as practicable, suspend, revise, or rescind, or publish for notice and comment proposed rules suspending, revising, or rescinding, those actions, as appropriate and consistent with law. Agencies shall endeavor to coordinate such regulatory reforms with their activities undertaken in compliance with Executive Order 13771 of January 30, 2017 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs).

Sec. 3. Rescission of Certain Energy and Climate-Related Presidential and Regulatory Actions. (a) The following Presidential actions are hereby revoked:(i) Executive Order 13653 of November 1, 2013 (Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change);(ii) The Presidential Memorandum of June 25, 2013 (Power Sector Carbon Pollution Standards);(iii) The Presidential Memorandum of November 3, 2015 (Mitigating Impacts on Natural Resources from Development and Encouraging Related Private Investment); and(iv) The Presidential Memorandum of September 21, 2016 (Climate Change and National Security).

(b) The following reports shall be rescinded:

(i) The Report of the Executive Office of the President of June 2013 (The President's Climate Action Plan); and(ii) The Report of the Executive Office of the President of March 2014 (Climate Action Plan Strategy to Reduce Methane Emissions).

(c) The Council on Environmental Quality shall rescind its final guidance entitled “Final Guidance for Federal Departments and Agencies on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Effects of Climate Change in National Environmental Policy Act Reviews,” which is referred to in “Notice of Availability,” 81 Fed. Reg. 51866 (August 5, 2016).

(d) The heads of all agencies shall identify existing agency actions related to or arising from the Presidential actions listed in subsection (a) of this section, the reports listed in subsection (b) of this section, or the final guidance listed in subsection (c) of this section. Each agency shall, as soon as practicable, suspend, revise, or rescind, or publish for notice and comment proposed rules suspending, revising, or rescinding any such actions, as appropriate and consistent with law and with the policies set forth in section 1 of this order.

Sec. 4. Review of the Environmental Protection Agency's “Clean Power Plan” and Related Rules and Agency Actions. (a) The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (Administrator) shall immediately take all steps necessary to review the final rules set forth in subsections (b)(i) and (b)(ii) of this section, and any rules and guidance issued pursuant to them, for consistency with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order and, if appropriate, shall, as soon as practicable, suspend, revise, or rescind the guidance, or publish for notice and comment proposed rules suspending, revising, or rescinding those rules. In addition, the Administrator shall immediately take all steps necessary to review the proposed rule set forth in subsection (b)(iii) of this section, and, if appropriate, shall, as soon as practicable, determine whether to revise or withdraw the proposed rule.

(c) The Administrator shall review and, if appropriate, as soon as practicable, take lawful action to suspend, revise, or rescind, as appropriate and consistent with law, the “Legal Memorandum Accompanying Clean Power Plan for Certain Issues,” which was published in conjunction with the Clean Power Plan.

(d) The Administrator shall promptly notify the Attorney General of any actions taken by the Administrator pursuant to this order related to the rules identified in subsection (b) of this section so that the Attorney General may, as appropriate, provide notice of this order and any such action to any court with jurisdiction over pending litigation related to those rules, and may, in his discretion, request that the court stay the litigation or otherwise delay further litigation, or seek other appropriate relief consistent with this order, pending the completion of the administrative actions described in subsection (a) of this section.

Sec. 5. Review of Estimates of the Social Cost of Carbon, Nitrous Oxide, and Methane for Regulatory Impact Analysis. (a) In order to ensure sound regulatory decision making, it is essential that agencies use estimates of costs and benefits in their regulatory analyses that are based on the best available science and economics.

(b) The Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases (IWG), which was convened by the Council of Economic Advisers and the OMB Director, shall be disbanded, and the following documents issued by the IWG shall be withdrawn as no longer representative of governmental policy:

(i) Technical Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive Order 12866 (February 2010);(ii) Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis (May 2013);(iii) Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis (November 2013);(iv) Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis (July 2015);(v) Addendum to the Technical Support Document for Social Cost of Carbon: Application of the Methodology to Estimate the Social Cost of Methane and the Social Cost of Nitrous Oxide (August 2016); and(vi) Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis (August 2016).

(c) Effective immediately, when monetizing the value of changes in greenhouse gas emissions resulting from regulations, including with respect to the consideration of domestic versus international impacts and the consideration of appropriate discount rates, agencies shall ensure, to the extent permitted by law, that any such estimates are consistent with the guidance contained in OMB Circular A-4 of September 17, 2003 (Regulatory Analysis), which was issued after peer review and public comment and has been widely accepted for more than a decade as embodying the best practices for conducting regulatory cost-benefit analysis.

Sec. 6. Federal Land Coal Leasing Moratorium. The Secretary of the Interior shall take all steps necessary and appropriate to amend or withdraw Secretary's Order 3338 dated January 15, 2016 (Discretionary Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) to Modernize the Federal Coal Program), and to lift any and all moratoria on Federal land coal leasing activities related to Order 3338. The Secretary shall commence Federal coal leasing activities consistent with all applicable laws and regulations.Sec. 7. Review of Regulations Related to United States Oil and Gas Development. (a) The Administrator shall review the final rule entitled “Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources,” 81 Fed. Reg. 35824 (June 3, 2016), and any rules and guidance issued pursuant to it, for consistency with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order and, if appropriate, shall, as soon as practicable, suspend, revise, or rescind the guidance, or publish for notice and comment proposed rules suspending, revising, or rescinding those rules.

(b) The Secretary of the Interior shall review the following final rules, and any rules and guidance issued pursuant to them, for consistency with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order and, if appropriate, shall, as soon as practicable, suspend, revise, or rescind the guidance, or publish for notice and comment proposed rules suspending, revising, or rescinding those rules:

(c) The Administrator or the Secretary of the Interior, as applicable, shall promptly notify the Attorney General of any actions taken by them related to the rules identified in subsections (a) and (b) of this section so that the Attorney General may, as appropriate, provide notice of this order and any such action to any court with jurisdiction over pending litigation related to those rules, and may, in his discretion, request that the court stay the litigation or otherwise delay further litigation, or seek other appropriate relief consistent with this order, until the completion of the administrative actions described in subsections (a) and (b) of this section.

Sec. 8. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

Trump.EPSTHE WHITE HOUSE,March 28, 2017.[FR Doc. 2017-06576 Filed 3-30-17; 11:15 am]Billing code 3295-F7-P8261Friday, March 31, 2017Presidential DocumentsNotice of March 29, 2017Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to Significant Malicious Cyber-Enabled ActivitiesOn April 1, 2015, by Executive Order 13694, the President declared a national emergency pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706) to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States constituted by the increasing prevalence and severity of malicious cyber-enabled activities originating from, or directed by persons located, in whole or in substantial part, outside the United States. On December 28, 2016, the President issued Executive Order 13757 to take additional steps to address the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13694.These significant malicious cyber-enabled activities continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States. For this reason, the national emergency declared on April 1, 2015, must continue in effect beyond April 1, 2017. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13694.This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress.Trump.EPSTHE WHITE HOUSE,March 29, 2017.[FR Doc. 2017-06583 Filed 3-30-17; 11:15 am]Billing code 3295-F7-P